Psp collections: views and more by Paul Phillips

What people said

bjwbell · 2015-09 · Recommendation

Going by Paul Phillips's (largest contributor to the scala compiler) YouTube rant, [VIDEO] , nobody ever gets over the cliffs. His rant is great, for more than just scala.

Read the original HN comment ↗

laureny · 2014-02 · Recommendation

> Or use a better language ;-). E.g. in Scala You might want to watch Paul Phillips' recent talk: [VIDEO] You will probably start changing your mind about whether Scala is a "better" language. Especially on the collections side. > to get all the benefits without the drawbacks of Java style subtyping. Actually, the Scala collections have the exact same problems caused by subtyping that Java does (and quite a few more actually, as Paul explains).

Read the original HN comment ↗

wpietri · 2018-04 · Criticism

Could you (and perhaps others) say more about this? I was excited to read that key goals were simplification, clarification, and consolidation. But my exact worry is that they didn't go far enough. I liked the idea of Scala and took Odersky's course. But I built a few things in it and it was never not frustrating. What Bruce Eckels said resonates with me: "I’ve come to view Scala as a landscape of cliffs – you can start feeling pretty comfortable with the language and think that you have a reasonable grasp of it, then suddenly fall off a cliff that makes you realize that no, you still don’t get it." Then I watched this Paul Phillips talk, which convinced me that the problems were deep, not superficial: [VIDEO] My hope with Dotty, etc, was that they had learned a little humility and were pruning back enough to make it a decent developer experience. But I could well believe that it was impossible to do enough and still end up with something that could be fairly called Scala.

Read the original HN comment ↗