Hacker News Reader

Comment by sunnyshahmca | Hacker News Reader

I think, SBT is better than Maven. It allows interactive development.

Maven allows interactive development too when using the IDE integration. An IDE is in a better position to have that kind of information and integrate it well (e.g. an IDE can run tests on save without having to watch the filesystem for changes).

SBT is not adequately documented, relies too much on symbol-heavy syntax, and allows arbitrary code in build definitions.

Symbol heavy syntax as opposed to symbol free xml? Could you elaborate?

XML uses three symbols: <, >, and /. And it's a well-known, documented standard. Looking at the last project I depended on, its build.sbt uses :=, %, %%, /, <+=, <<= (in addition to standard Scala symbols like +=, ++=, ++, =>, <=, >=, which an inexperienced developer wouldn't necessarily realise weren't part of SBT's own syntax). That's not an exhaustive list (I've used :+= and :++= as examples in another thread) and I have no idea where to find one. Heck, I've been a professional Scala developer for 5 years and I have literally no idea what <+= or <<= mean.

You forgot &entities;

And there is an oft-documented overuse of custom operators among Scala programmers, however I don't have sufficient expertise to gauge the resulting problems in practice.

> You forgot &entities;

I did; in fairness I don't think I've ever seen one in a maven pom.xml

Reply on news.ycombinator.com