I think it’s nice to be able to use it. But like pretty much everything in scala, it’s a huge smorgasbord of things from which you can choose. I personally don’t use that syntax, but it’s cool that I can and sometimes I do just for fun.

▲

jll29 2 days ago | parent [-]

A language should not be complicated. (Wish Odersky, capable as he is, kept working on his much-verlooked TurboModula).

Simple:

- Scheme

- C

- Pascal

- Go

- Lua

Complicated

- PL/1

- C++ 2024

- Scala 3

Still borderline or beyond?

- Rust

- Java (>850 pp. lang. specification...)

	▲	still_grokking 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Extremely weird list. The Scala spec is much shorter than the C spec… Also it's of course much shorter than Rust, where nobody has a real issue with its complexity, at least nobody is complaining really loudly. The C and Go specs are actually extremely involved, long, and complex given that the languages almost don't have any features at all. But comparing language specs isn't a 100% fair metric. One should instead look at formal language semantic definitions written all in the same way. If you look at these you will for example learn that the C semantics are much more complex than for example Java. Check out https://kframework.org/ to learn more. (A list of semantics for different languages can be found on the "projects" sub page).