Guido took a look at Scala recently and he came out a bit intimidated by the language, which matches my perception. I initially started with quite a lot of fondness for Scala but as I dug deeper in the language, the complexity and a few specific features started to worry me.
I have been following the Scala mailing-list for a few years now and the snippets of code I read on a daily basis have been increasingly complex and frightening, and it’s taking me more and more time to make sense of them. Not a good sign.
Anyway, read Guido’s take and especially the comments. Here is one I found particularly interesting, from David Pollak, the creator of Lift:
But, unlike my Ruby code, [with Scala] I only need 50%-60% test coverage (vs. 95% coverage) to have stable, deployable code.
This is an angle that I have often been defending in the debate that pits statically against dynamically typed languages, but it’s the first time that I come across such strong evidence.