Coffeehouse Thread

8 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Scala for .NET

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    blowdart

    http://www.scala-lang.org/node/10299

    There are many reasons why this is attractive both to the developer and to companies in general. Scala is a concise and highly productive programming language. By using Scala on .Net, developers can produce applications more quickly and have the possibility of deploying them across the two major industry platforms, JVM and .Net.

    For the programmer it makes a great deal more sense too, learning one language to build applications for both environments. From a company point of view scarce resources, good developers, can be moved easily between platforms reducing training costs, increasing flexibility and reducing risks. .Net provides an integration platform for several languages and this implementation of Scala inter-operates nicely. You can use existing .Net libraries or applications without re-writing everything in Scala. A low risk way to explore the potential of Scala. Ultimately it means that many tools and applications created for the .Net and JVM environments can be ported from one to the other. A win-win situation for everyone.

  • User profile image
    felix9

    now, some benchmarks ?

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    ,felix9 wrote

    now, some benchmarks ?

    Yea, that'll be interesting, shimming to another shim (IKVM) and dismissing the standard .NET collections (hello, interop?) doesn't fill me with hope for performance, which is one of the main reasons to use Scala.

  • User profile image
    Frank Hileman

    @blowdart: according to Miguel, "the much better Scala collections library would be the natural developer choice anyway." Not sure why they are much better, but the .net framework collections were always a little strange.

  • User profile image
    Adam​Speight2008

    Maybe the "better" bit the Scala collections can be immutable.

    Also can't Scala be generic on both parts  M<T> ,  T and the M,

  • User profile image
    exoteric

    Clearly Scala collections are better factored. Immutability/mutability is but one axis:

    Source: http://www.scala-lang.org/docu/files/collections-api/collections.html

    The following figure shows all collections in package scala.collection. These are all high-level abstract classes or traits, which generally have mutable as well as immutable implementations.

     

    <image not found>

     

    The following figure shows all collections in package scala.collection.immutable.

     

    <image not found>

     

    And the following figure shows all collections in package scala.collection.mutable.

     

    <image not found>

     

    (All three figures were generated by Matthias at decodified.com).

    I don't know if Scala has something like LINQ though, in particular IQueryable. Apart from this, a prime concern would be performance.

  • User profile image
    felix9

    the Traversable trait has many operations, similiar to LINQ.

    http://www.scala-lang.org/docu/files/collections-api/collections_3.html

    the collections api was the major feature of Scala 2.8, very advanced stuff

    http://www.artima.com/scalazine/articles/scala_collections_architecture.html

    and parallel collections was a major feature of Scala 2.9

    http://www.infoq.com/news/2011/05/scala-29

     

  • User profile image
    Frank Hileman

    @exoteric:, @felix9: I can see the scala collection design is much better than the .net collection design. Reminds me of the STL. When will .net developers get nice collections like that?

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.