As someone who's been using Scala for the better part of a couple years:
This seems more like a more ambitious version of the Shapeless and ScalaZ libraries (with some of the same crowd/authors).
I (and I suspect most people who program in Scala for a living) don't use those libraries. Not because they're in any way bad. But there are trade-offs using them IME. The biggest being compile-time. So I get by fine without.
I think this is probably generally good news. In the same way that (I believe) JRuby pushed MRI forward and popularized the case for a multi-threading VM, more advanced type features in this fork probably benefit the Scala community as a whole.
I certainly don't see how it could be harmful. Typesafe isn't going away. The vast majority of businesses will still use their compiler. If you didn't use the advanced-type-based-libraries before, this news probably isn't going to impact you anyway.
So from where I'm standing, having made a late 2.9 to 2.10 transition, and now having made several 2.10 to 2.11 transitions, Scala seems a very mature language/platform to me. Libraries are generally upgraded fairly quickly, and source wise, those releases broke very little (2.11 being the biggest culprit just because of the modularization effort, but that's pretty trivial to resolve).
I dunno. It's not Java. But it's not Ruby either. It's gotten new features since 2.9, but it's broken or changed very little. I find working with it, even working through upgrades, very stable and mostly frustration free.
As someone involved in the scala community (and scalaz) community, I'd say about 60% of the companies I talk to at the various meetups use at the very least #scalaz. I was pleasantly surprised.
Could this be a biased sample though? Not saying this is the case but it seems logical that the people at the scala meetups are cut from a cloth that would make them more likely to be using things such as scalaz.
I know that my local scala meetup seems to be more heavily oriented towards the functional end of things than the bulk of the scala developers I interact with. OTOH, perhaps the bias is with my sample.
Comments
As someone who's been using Scala for the better part of a couple years:
This seems more like a more ambitious version of the Shapeless and ScalaZ libraries (with some of the same crowd/authors).
I (and I suspect most people who program in Scala for a living) don't use those libraries. Not because they're in any way bad. But there are trade-offs using them IME. The biggest being compile-time. So I get by fine without.
I think this is probably generally good news. In the same way that (I believe) JRuby pushed MRI forward and popularized the case for a multi-threading VM, more advanced type features in this fork probably benefit the Scala community as a whole.
I certainly don't see how it could be harmful. Typesafe isn't going away. The vast majority of businesses will still use their compiler. If you didn't use the advanced-type-based-libraries before, this news probably isn't going to impact you anyway.
So from where I'm standing, having made a late 2.9 to 2.10 transition, and now having made several 2.10 to 2.11 transitions, Scala seems a very mature language/platform to me. Libraries are generally upgraded fairly quickly, and source wise, those releases broke very little (2.11 being the biggest culprit just because of the modularization effort, but that's pretty trivial to resolve).
I dunno. It's not Java. But it's not Ruby either. It's gotten new features since 2.9, but it's broken or changed very little. I find working with it, even working through upgrades, very stable and mostly frustration free.
As someone involved in the scala community (and scalaz) community, I'd say about 60% of the companies I talk to at the various meetups use at the very least #scalaz. I was pleasantly surprised.
Could this be a biased sample though? Not saying this is the case but it seems logical that the people at the scala meetups are cut from a cloth that would make them more likely to be using things such as scalaz.
I know that my local scala meetup seems to be more heavily oriented towards the functional end of things than the bulk of the scala developers I interact with. OTOH, perhaps the bias is with my sample.