Ah, but you are comparing line by line or function by function. Is a 3 line scala for comprehension doing simple mapping more 'readable' than a 10 line java loop? Well, depending on who you ask the answer is either "about the same" or "less readable" if they aren't familiar with the idiom.
However, it's pointless to compare methods when we need to be comparing applications. In my experience, I'd say I get about... 100 times reduction in LOC compared to a java application. Not hyperbole, two orders of magnitude LOC reduction compared to java applications.
Now, given that information, does it matter if each particular line takes you three times as long to read? With more type safety to boot?
I don't think anyone is criticizing for comprehensions as unreadable. Implicits in particular introduce non-local effects that may not visible from reading a particular piece of code, and in my experience should be used sparingly.
Comments
Ah, but you are comparing line by line or function by function. Is a 3 line scala for comprehension doing simple mapping more 'readable' than a 10 line java loop? Well, depending on who you ask the answer is either "about the same" or "less readable" if they aren't familiar with the idiom.
However, it's pointless to compare methods when we need to be comparing applications. In my experience, I'd say I get about... 100 times reduction in LOC compared to a java application. Not hyperbole, two orders of magnitude LOC reduction compared to java applications.
Now, given that information, does it matter if each particular line takes you three times as long to read? With more type safety to boot?
I don't think anyone is criticizing for comprehensions as unreadable. Implicits in particular introduce non-local effects that may not visible from reading a particular piece of code, and in my experience should be used sparingly.