Back in my uni days, aka not that long ago, the scala (which I love)/perl (which I hate) comparison is what made me realise that language arguments are almost always pointless. Any choice you make in a certain class of language is probably going to be roughly equal in terms of ease of use, productivity, whatever; so you might as well just go with what you are comfortable with.

I also love scala and hate perl. I wonder how close the correlation actually is - do the same type of people really like both, or is this just something people who don't like scala say?

I am not as fluent in Scala as I am in Perl, but I do like both. Perhaps, I am an exception.

> so you might as well just go with what you are comfortable with

Very true. I was thinking of the ethos of Perl and Scala, and wasn't trying to compare the languages directly.

> Scala feels like the Perl of the modern era: there is more than one way to do it.

Scala is definitely a TMTOWTDI language.

> However, I think there's a reason Python and Ruby have overtaken Perl in the interpreted language space: Python values simpler solutions [1]. Ruby also values a certain type of beauty over Perl.

Ruby -- like Perl and Scala -- is also a TMTOWTDI language, its probably the most important thing it inherited from Perl (the one Perlism it isn't shedding as it grows.)

So, "Ruby and Python have overtaken Perl" isn't an indicator of something wrong with the TMTOWTDI approach.

For me personally, if they weren't running in the JVM, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The JVM is key for many as operational stability trumps developer finger-candy. It's an easy sell to add a language change it, when it's not really going to change how an entire part of the organization is going to manage it.