Hacker News Reader

Comment by tormeh | Hacker News Reader

Note that unconventional symbols are very rare in the standard library. Third-party libraries, especially those made by the scaskell community, are where the problem lies. If one uses scalaz one gets what one deserves.

Edit: replaced "you" with "one" to clarify

View on HN

I was going to mention Haskell as being similar. Lots of custom infix operators. On the one hand, once you know a library's custom operators it can make for very clean code, but it can be tough to read code for a library you don't know. I guess it's mitigated a bit by the fact that a lot of Haskell operators generalize well, so the same symbols tend to be used to do something similar, but it can be abused.

Never used scalaz.

I looked into stuff like Lift and Play

Lift is worse than Scalaz and barely maintained. I can't speak for Play; I use Spray for REST APIs (somewhat symbolic, but oh so worth it for the glorious routing DSL that combines the clarity of a config file with the refactorability and safety of code) and Wicket for HTML UIs.

Yes, it was probably 2009, that I looked into Lift when it was considered THE Scala web framework. But later Play seemed to have taken the place.

Just an example of spray:

   get {
     path("foo" / IntNumber) { itemId =>
       {
          complete("You just looked for foo #" + itemId)
       }
   }

Or:

   path("foo") {
     parameter('id.as[Int] ?) { (maybeId: Option[Int]) =>
        {
        ...
        }
     }
   }

I can't say I have any objection to this bizarre use of symbology.

Someone asked recently on the mailing list if Lift is dead.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/liftweb/dA5NUjkqB-4

Link didn't work for me, but I suspect Lift has been dead for a while. It was fine for the time, but if you want a full framework Play is pretty much better in every way, and if you want a light framework you have Akka-HTTP and others..

Sorry

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/liftweb/dead/lift...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com