>What does that even mean?
Scala has a strong, somewhat modernish type system. That protects against many bugs. Java does not. Java libraries can contain code that breaks assertions the scala language makes.
>With Haskell you have Haskell's ecosystem, nothing less, nothing more
Sure. But haskell's ecosystem is miles ahead of scala's. So it is less common to need to resort to using a C lib than it is to have to resort to using a java lib from scala. Yes, tooling and documentation are a huge part of the ecosystem, and scala is pretty awful in that regard.
Re:Scala: sharp and gets things cut
by gclaramunt on Monday October 07, 2013 @11:30PM
(#6512874)
Haskell's ecosystem is far from all "wine and roses": my few experiences with cabal were not what I hoped to put it mildly, since 2010 I have a yearly yak shaving ritual called "try to install leksah" that only this year was successful, and last time I've tried to install the latest version of the Haskell platform on my Ubuntu box, had to build it form the source manually installing the profiling packages on one by one.
In no way it qualifies as "miles ahead of Scala"
I didn't say it was all wine and roses. I said it was miles ahead of scala. It absolutely is.
Re:Scala: sharp and gets things cut
by gclaramunt on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @10:19AM
(#6515094)
I love Haskell, but disagree :)
What does that even mean? There's full Java interop, so I just add a dependency on JodaTime and voila, a kick ass library at my finger tips. That is by and large the ecosystem, a massive wealth of functionality, followed by community and tooling (which in Scala is admittedly a weak point).
With Haskell you have Haskell's ecosystem, nothing less, nothing more. So if a Haskeller hasn't developed, for example, a PDF generator to produce client invoices, you're SOL short of writing it yourself.