Folks,

I've been doing Scala for three years as of today.  I wrote a blog post
about it:
http://blog.lostlake.org/index.php?/archives/97-Happy-3rd-Anniversay....

There are a lot of people to thank for making Scala the great thing it is
today.  Martin has led his EPFL team to bridge academia and commercial,
vigorous debating and politeness, functional and object oriented to bring us
Scala and the Scala community.

It's been 3 years for me and I can't think of a better language or a better
community than what Scala has evolved into.

Thanks,

David

--
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics

In this video http://blog.linkedin.com/2009/06/15/video-linkedin-scala-tech-talk/,
Martin (Scala creator) says that he will concentrated his efforts, so
in 5 years Scala will be the language of choice for concurrency. This
is an awesome thing.
In this same talk, a Twitter engineer says that Erlang is not suited
to their environment, and the illustrious David Pollak (Lift creator
=) says that if Twitter uses Lift they would not need to worry about
their scale infrastructure. xD

I don't know if I learn Erlang or Scala first. Both seems to have a
great future (and already have a great present =).

On Nov 20, 6:21 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com>
wrote:

The folks at Twitter (some of who are Lift committers) do in fact use Scala.

My exact quote (during a round-table at LinkedIn) is that a Lift application
could handle 1/4 of Twitter's then-current traffic on a single server.
 Specifically, Lift-based applications can handle > 2K dynamically generated
pages per second on a quad-core Intel machine.  This compares with < 100
pages per second on a similar machine running Rails.

Twitter's scaling issues are not related, however, to the front end, but the
back end.  Twitter's initial design put all the logic (and pressure) into
the database.  There are only so many queries an RDBMS can do in a second.
Twitter has over the last 18 months implemented a back end that does not put
all of the timeline logic into the database.  This is independent of the web
front end.

Erlang's big feature over Scala (besides my impression that it has a
slightly more functional "feel") is its concurrent process and messaging
system, which is really a run-time thing rather than a language thing,
and which is a concept that's already reasonably familiar (in rather
less sophisticated form) to many programmers already.

Scala, on the other hand, offers a fairly sophisticated type system
including algebraic types, which is a concept rarely seen outside
of the FP world (ML and its relatives such as Haskell). That's very
mind-expanding, and well worth learning about.

You might also consider learning Haskell (or one of its relatives such
as Clean), which I consider to have more new concepts than any other
language out there except for perhaps Oz.

cjs
--
Curt Sampson       <c...@starling-software.com>        +81 90 7737 2974
           Functional programming in all senses of the word:
                   http://www.starling-software.com

I'm Java programmer, so I would like to learn a language that do
things that Java can't (or can, but in a more difficult way).
Two things that I miss in Java is that a function is not a type, I
can't pass a function as parameter nor return a function like I do in
Scheme, and the other one is closure, I can't pass a block of code to
a function like I do in Ruby.
Just one thing of the above would be good, because one replaces the
need of the other, right?

I think the future (already the present in some places) is programming
for multi-cores. Erlang is a concurrent programming language, so maybe
is the better language for this purpose. There are some nice projects
using Erlang http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_%28programming_language%29#Projec...
and after watch this presentation http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Systems-that-Never-Stop-Joe-Armstrong
I become a little excited about Erlang.

I will take a look in Haskell. ;-)

On Nov 21, 10:39 pm, Curt Sampson <c...@cynic.net> wrote:

Thanks very much for your reply Curt!

  

If the question is what to learn first, rather than in what to start
implementing a major system, I'd chose Scala over Erlang.
    

And if my question is: what to start implementing a major system?
Which one would you choose? =)

I'm Java programmer, so I would like to learn a language that do
things that Java can't (or can, but in a more difficult way).
Two things that I miss in Java is that a function is not a type, I
can't pass a function as parameter nor return a function like I do in
Scheme, and the other one is closure, I can't pass a block of code to
a function like I do in Ruby.
Just one thing of the above would be good, because one replaces the
need of the other, right?

I think the future (already the present in some places) is programming
for multi-cores. Erlang is a concurrent programming language, so maybe
is the better language for this purpose. There are some nice projects
using Erlang http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_%28programming_language%29#Projects_using_Erlang
and after watch this presentation http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Systems-that-Never-Stop-Joe-Armstrong
I become a little excited about Erlang.

I will take a look in Haskell. ;-)

On Nov 21, 10:39 pm, Curt Sampson <c...@cynic.net> wrote:
  

On 2009-11-21 15:17 -0800 (Sat), tivrfoa wrote:

    

I don't know if I learn Erlang or Scala first. Both seems to have a
great future (and already have a great present =).
      

If the question is what to learn first, rather than in what to start
implementing a major system, I'd chose Scala over Erlang.

Erlang's big feature over Scala (besides my impression that it has a
slightly more functional "feel") is its concurrent process and messaging
system, which is really a run-time thing rather than a language thing,
and which is a concept that's already reasonably familiar (in rather
less sophisticated form) to many programmers already.

Scala, on the other hand, offers a fairly sophisticated type system
including algebraic types, which is a concept rarely seen outside
of the FP world (ML and its relatives such as Haskell). That's very
mind-expanding, and well worth learning about.

You might also consider learning Haskell (or one of its relatives such
as Clean), which I consider to have more new concepts than any other
language out there except for perhaps Oz.

cjs
--
Curt Sampson       <c...@starling-software.com>        +81 90 7737 2974
           Functional programming in all senses of the word:
                   http://www.starling-software.com
    

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CUFP" group.
To post to this group, send email to cufp@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cufp+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cufp?hl=en.


  

Yeah, polymorphism is a good workaround.

Thank you!

On Nov 25, 5:41 pm, "S. Alexander Jacobson" <a...@alexjacobson.com>
wrote: