The Scala community

Have you ever looked at Simply Scala (http://www.simplyscala.com/)? It
seems no one learning Scala learns of it, and I always thought it is
probably the best first impression of Scala that can be had.

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 22:48, Xiaohan Zhang wrote:
> Stack Overflow and blog posts were BY FAR my best source of
> information. I didn't even learn that these mailing lists existed
> until a few months ago, and that was only after searching through the
> http://www.scala-lang.org website quite a bit. It's quite intimidating
> to ask questions here because it seems like everyone else is on a much
> higher level than me. SO doesn't have that feel, and is already a
> wonderful knowledge repository. IMO the Scala portion of SO already
> does the job of scala-beginner. Programming in Scala online edition
> was also a massive help.
>
> That being said, when I first started learning Scala, I often looked
> to the Code Examples sections of scala-lang.org to try and find my
> answers and they were unhelpful, to say the least. Most of the code
> examples haven't been updated in three years (many still use the
> deprecated Application), and many have no documentation attached to
> them. For instance, http://www.scala-lang.org/node/230. The only
> comment is completely useless in helping me learn what's going on in
> that example. The other examples are similar. I also looked to the
> examples under "A tour of Scala" and those were completely beyond me.
> For instance, http://www.scala-lang.org/node/124. I still have no idea
> what an explicitly typed self-reference is. I'm sure I could
> understand it after some research, but I think a significant number of
> people are going to use the examples in the official Scala website as
> their first resource.
>
> Thanks,
> Xiaohan Zhang
> p5wscala.wordpress.com/about-me/
>
> On Oct 6, 12:56 am, martin wrote:
>> Here's a recent mail on reddit, which we should take very seriously.
>>
>> I agree with the points in the mail. I think the community has a major job
>> to do to help people get into the language instead being obscure and riding
>> academic high horses.
>>
>> I would like to start with this list. Please everyone, remember: This list
>> is for helping people getting into Scala and getting their questions
>> answered. That's the primary purpose of scala-user. If you are after
>> intellectual arguments, no problem, but please use scala-debate. If you want
>> to force an intellectual argument on a newbie that asked a simple question,
>> that's just bad style.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>  -- Martin
>>
>> =======================================================================
>>
>> I tried to use Scala, and found it has one major disadvantage going for it,
>> the community.
>>
>> Most of the developers for Scala and community members I interacted with
>> were very focused on being right from a computer science perspective, and
>> from their own view on how things should be done. They were not at all
>> focused on helping developers actually get work done. This extended to the
>> libraries that come with Scala. If they didn't like how you did something,
>> they made the libraries much harder to accomplish that task with. As an
>> example, appending to a list requires a rather cryptic syntax (myList :::=
>> "something").
>>
>> Along with that, Scala seems to be in love with symbols. They use them
>> everywhere, and many times portions of the syntax are optional, so you can
>> see different incarnations of the same syntax look very different in
>> different places.
>>
>> Also Scala has a very high learning curve for traditional Java developers.
>> Instead of making this curve workable by gradually introducing developers to
>> advanced features, the Scala libraries and all it's documentation force you
>> to see all the concepts all at once. They often do a very poor job of
>> explaining why they force you to do things their way, and just tell you to
>> do them.
>>
>> While the Scala language technically lets you program in a way similar to
>> Java, but with advanced features as needed, the libraries are written in a
>> way to make this nearly impossible.
>>
>> What all this means is that a developer from any traditional OOP language,
>> or less complex language is going to have a very very hard time learning
>> Scala, and in the end the time you lost learning won't make up for any
>> advantage Scala's 'way' provides.
>>
>> As long as the Scala community is so obtuse and focused on being right their
>> way, as opposed to helping developers get into the language, Scala will
>> remain a nitch language.
>

In the light of Martin's mail I just want to reproduce the feedback of some of
my peers when I asked them if they already took a look at scala-the-language
(over the last 1.5 years - so some of the answers might be different today,
but its hard to push the "retry" button on someone who has already turned
away).

Context: people who toyed with scala did so out of curiosity in their spare
time.

The main feedback was kind of
"I tried it - but hey, there is so much about that language to learn and look
into... I just gave up."

When I queried further it boiled down to (most often to least often):

* Bad impression from the API
"I surfed the API. It didn't manage to introduce me sufficiently to its
concepts or use cases. So I dropped it (the language) as waste of time".

Just my private 2 cents
best wishes
Bernd

In the light of Martin's mail I just want to reproduce the feedback of some of
my peers when I asked them if they already took a look at scala-the-language
(over the last 1.5 years - so some of the answers might be different today,
but its hard to push the "retry" button on someone who has already turned
away).

Context: people who toyed with scala did so out of curiosity in their spare
time.

The main feedback was kind of
"I tried it - but hey, there is so much about that language to learn and look
into... I just gave up."

When I queried further it boiled down to (most often to least often):

* difficulties to find a comprehensive introduction which got them (from java
background) to speed and  provided a satisfying "first contact" experience.
"There where lots of things in the web - but the more I read the more I got
confused. I just didn't get the picture..."

* difficulties to see where scala could be useful (without jobs in the
pipeline)
"Sure, it's looking nice - but what could I do with it?"

* Bad impression from the API
"I surfed the API. It didn't manage to introduce me sufficiently to its
concepts or use cases. So I dropped it (the language) as waste of time".

* Only one refered to the "academic" air (also with some stronger words). I
suppose he got biten somehow directly or read something which sparked his
rejection (I didn't ask further). Unfortunately  he's someone I would consider
a key player in adoption.

Bottom line: the community is very important. And it can drive people away for
sure. If the wrong one are hit that can be bad.

But my impression is that the failure to sustain the "hobbyist's" interest
that was sparked once is more tied to the state of documentation.
People just had too hard a time to find the right resource to get them going
or not enough "advertisment" to show them what a crazy tool the get once they
master the first step.

Note: I can't estimate however how serious these "first contacts" were.
Note: with "hobbyist" I mean battle tested java people with an initial
interest in scala

What to do about it?
* better API documentation => currently under way. Find a way to have some
package "overview" pages.
* "official" compilation of suggested reading tracks (preferably online stuff
- book references is more for those who really get going)
* try to collect reasons why people turn away (I know - scala will not fit
every bill. But it's not good to loose the wrong ones and it's even worse not
to know at all, why people turn away).
* Showcases - scala is useful!
=> hey, the REPL is an amazing tool on its own. Let's showcase the power of
the language and collection API by sharing small day-to-day scripting
solutions as copy-and-modify starters.

Just my private 2 cents
best wishes
Bernd

On 08/10/2011 20:31, Ken McDonald wrote:
> 1) I have _never_ liked the names of the various scala groups. They were
> confusing to me when I came in, and are still confusing, the the same
> manner, to newcomers. Seriously, how should it be obvious that
> "scala-lang" is a "more advanced" group than "scala-user"?

Looked quite obvious the first time I came across them. But then again,
I see some newbies questions in scala-language, so I agree it might not
be so obvious to everybody.

> My suggestions:
> - scala-newcomer

Too restrictive

> - scala-user

Too generic: everybody is a Scala user, including M. Odersky, Phillips, etc.

> - scala-typing

Everybody type on a keyboard to write Scala code, no?
Ah, as in type system? Isn't it too restrictive? You use types everywhere.

> - scala-development

Ambiguous. Everybody (in the community) do development with Scala. If
that's Scala language (compiler) development, it should be more
explicit. At least Scala implementation(s) is clear.

By the way, I checked List and counted 10 methods with symbols (one
mixed, 9 purely symbolic) out of almost 150 methods, not counting
overloads.

So the accusation of being operator-happy is hardly accurate.

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 15:31, Ken McDonald wrote:
> I agree with some of what the poster (not Martin, the other guy) says, and
> disagree with some of it. First, some general comments
>     1) I have _never_ liked the names of the various scala groups. They were
> confusing to me when I came in, and are still confusing, the the same
> manner, to newcomers. Seriously, how should it be obvious that "scala-lang"
> is a "more advanced" group than "scala-user"? Thank goodness we at least
> have a separate "scalaz". My suggestions:
>           - scala-newcomer
>           - scala-user
>           - scala-typing
>           - scala-development
> And on the IDE from, please change "scala-ide" to "scala-eclipse" OR allow
> it to function as its name promises, and discussion forum for Scala and
> IDEs.
>
> On Thursday, October 6, 2011 2:56:41 AM UTC-5, martin wrote:
>>
>> Here's a recent mail on reddit, which we should take very seriously.
>>
>> I agree with the points in the mail. I think the community has a major job
>> to do to help people get into the language instead being obscure and riding
>> academic high horses.
>>
>> I would like to start with this list. Please everyone, remember: This list
>> is for helping people getting into Scala and getting their questions
>> answered. That's the primary purpose of scala-user. If you are after
>> intellectual arguments, no problem, but please use scala-debate. If you want
>> to force an intellectual argument on a newbie that asked a simple question,
>> that's just bad style.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>  -- Martin
>>
>> =======================================================================
>>
>> I tried to use Scala, and found it has one major disadvantage going for
>> it, the community.
>>
>> Most of the developers for Scala and community members I interacted with
>> were very focused on being right from a computer science perspective, and
>> from their own view on how things should be done. They were not at all
>> focused on helping developers actually get work done. This extended to the
>> libraries that come with Scala. If they didn't like how you did something,
>> they made the libraries much harder to accomplish that task with. As an
>> example, appending to a list requires a rather cryptic syntax (myList :::=
>> "something").
>
> I've found that somewhat true, but not to the extent of the writer.
>
>>
>> Along with that, Scala seems to be in love with symbols. They use them
>> everywhere, and many times portions of the syntax are optional, so you can
>> see different incarnations of the same syntax look very different in
>> different places.
>
> Point out that symbols are used (fairly) consistently, and are in the
> Scaladoc.
>
>>
>> Also Scala has a very high learning curve for traditional Java developers.
>> Instead of making this curve workable by gradually introducing developers to
>> advanced features, the Scala libraries and all it's documentation force you
>> to see all the concepts all at once. They often do a very poor job of
>> explaining why they force you to do things their way, and just tell you to
>> do them.
>
> Well, I've given a number of informal presentations to Java devs, and always
> start with showing how a Scala def of a Complex type can vastly reduce
> boilerplate, and then present one or two simply examples of Scala typing to
> take the fear out of it :-). Again, I think this would be solved by have a
> "scala-newcomers" groups.
>>
>> While the Scala language technically lets you program in a way similar to
>> Java, but with advanced features as needed, the libraries are written in a
>> way to make this nearly impossible.
>
> I don't really know where that complaint comes from. It wasn't my
> experience.
>
>>
>> What all this means is that a developer from any traditional OOP language,
>> or less complex language is going to have a very very hard time learning
>> Scala, and in the end the time you lost learning won't make up for any
>> advantage Scala's 'way' provides.
>
> Partially disagree. It's very easy to learn to use Scala like Java. More
> difficult to learn the more advance stuff (no surprise), but that's a reason
> for user groups at various levels.
>
>>
>> As long as the Scala community is so obtuse and focused on being right
>> their way, as opposed to helping developers get into the language, Scala
>> will remain a nitch language.
>
> This is true for some developers, but I certainly haven't found it true for
> most.

OMG you people are sure vocal - less than 24 hours and I cannot keep up
with it all.

Personally I find there is too much stuff on scala-user that is 'WAY
over my head' but is it interesting to learn how much I do not understand.

There is too much stuff on scala-user that should be on scala-debate
(that I also read).

Please just keep scala-user for newbies and innocent questions. Please
be kind and patient to people on scala-user. Please direct people to
scala-debate for more serious stuff. If I am stupid enough to say
something on scala-debate please feel free to flame on at me as much as
you want - I already know I am in the deep end of the intelligence pool :-)

Cheers, Eric

On 07/10/2011 00:42, David McLaughlin wrote:

> you are simultaneously saying "it is better to be polite than right."

They aren't exclusive options.

On 06/10/2011 15:04, eptx wrote:
> Thank you for sharing this valuable feedback Martin. A few thoughts to
> help:
> [...]
> 2) A helpful way to change culture is to recognize those who exhibit
> the "good" behavior. There are many on this list, Stack Overflow, and
> dozens of Scala lists that are both very bright *and* very helpful to
> beginners. Who are the top 10?

That's strange, because for me, Tony and Paulp would be up in that top
10: they make me learn *a lot* of things. But it seems that their way of
answering is disliked by most. Well, they were not the only one, and
other people like Daniel Sobral or Meredith Gregory were also very very
helpful.

Perhaps there is *also* a problem with they way questions are asked, and
answer are heard (and studied). Well, all that to say: you can't just
ask people who spent their time trying to help other people to be nice
and kind and etc if people who asked question dismiss answer because
they don't want to invest some time to understand what is said, the
contracts must be on both parts.

Thanks,

Thank-you.

And as a counterpoint, I'd like to say I've had some very helpful replies (on and off-list) from several notables in the Scala community and which definitely helped sustain my interest in Scala.  Thank-you to those people as well.

On 06/10/2011 11:21, Detering Dirk wrote:
> Thank you, Martin, for this reprehension which indeed should be
> taken seriously. Everyone should meditate by himself about what
> that could mean for him.
>
> [...]
> The statement, that the effort to learn Scala does not pay back simply
> is wrong. Learning Scala indeed changed the way I look on my own Java
> code, approach problems and structure my solutions.
> I feel like I did not simply "learn" Scala but much more "studied" it
> to get there, and I am not finished!
>
> Once again, yes community, watch your attitudes, but I could not let
> that original post stand uncommented.

Thank you really much for your mail, that thread was starting to make me
sad (I discovered it an hour ago, that's a bunch a things to read).

I also recognized what you are living with my own experience 4 years
ago, and so my fear that the Scala community, that I found at the time
so helpful and bright and open-midding has so much radically changed. So
now, I know that it's just that their more people comming with different
expectation that what mine and seems to be yours.

I also see a bunch of people full of ideas about how to handle these new
kinds of people, and since it seems that they are more likelly than us
to understand what they expect, why they don't just do something ? If a
forum is such a necessity for these newcomer, well, why not just set-up
one and handle it as they think it should be ? I know for sure that I
can't be the good person for such a task, because I don't see the point
to forum. And I believe that most old people of that list are more or
less in the same un-understanding about that - that's just not how our
brain works.

Thanks,

another thing that came to my mind:

what i missed was a really easy tutorial that shows scala's features step by step, islolated from each other. on scala-lang.org, i found documentation/examples about lots of features, but most of them required me to already know about other features.

you can tutorial someone about many features isolated from each other:
closures (start at anonymous classes, then go to closure, then go to "use method as parameter that becomes a closure)
match (simple version, without unapply)
tuples
type parameter variance
case classes (auto equals & hashcode, maybe intrudoce unapply here)
automatic fields in classes (a contructor parameter automatically becoming a field)
collections (start at arraybuffer, listbuffer and mutable hashmap since they are the most common ones used in OOP, then go to immutable collections)
_ (by _ i really mean _, the wildcard thing. i do not meant _ as a wildcard in a sense of "anything else". i literally meant _)

then the libary builder / DSL stuff:
implicits, manifests, currying....

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 11:19:32 +0200
> Von: "Dennis Haupt"
> An: scala-user [at] googlegroups [dot] com, scala-user [at] googlegroups [dot] com
> Betreff: Re: [scala-user] The Scala community

> to pour in my experience:
> * the community was mostly helpful to me. in most cases, i got some
> academic and some pragmatic answers. the pragmatic ones are the ones i wanted and
> needed at first.
> later, as my understanding grew, the academic ones became more
> interesting.
>
> * my biggest obstacle when learning scala coming from java were to
> understand "method signature rampages". immutable datastructures where quite easy,
> the collections were easy to use, and closures were easy to understand.
>
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> > Datum: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 00:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
> > Von: martin
> > An: scala-user [at] googlegroups [dot] com
> > Betreff: [scala-user] The Scala community
>
> >
> >
> > Here's a recent mail on reddit, which we should take very seriously.
> >
> > I agree with the points in the mail. I think the community has a major
> job
> > to do to help people get into the language instead being obscure and
> > riding
> > academic high horses.
> >
> > I would like to start with this list. Please everyone, remember: This
> list
> > is for helping people getting into Scala and getting their questions
> > answered. That's the primary purpose of scala-user. If you are after
> > intellectual arguments, no problem, but please use scala-debate. If you
> > want
> > to force an intellectual argument on a newbie that asked a simple
> > question,
> > that's just bad style.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > -- Martin
> >
> > =======================================================================
> >
> > I tried to use Scala, and found it has one major disadvantage going for
> > it,
> > the community.
> >
> > Most of the developers for Scala and community members I interacted with
> > were very focused on being right from a computer science perspective,
> and
> > from their own view on how things should be done. They were not at all
> > focused on helping developers actually get work done. This extended to
> the
> > libraries that come with Scala. If they didn't like how you did
> something,
> > they made the libraries much harder to accomplish that task with. As an
> > example, appending to a list requires a rather cryptic syntax (myList
> :::=
> > "something").
> >
> > Along with that, Scala seems to be in love with symbols. They use them
> > everywhere, and many times portions of the syntax are optional, so you
> can
> > see different incarnations of the same syntax look very different in
> > different places.
> >
> > Also Scala has a very high learning curve for traditional Java
> developers.
> > Instead of making this curve workable by gradually introducing
> developers
> > to
> > advanced features, the Scala libraries and all it's documentation force
> > you
> > to see all the concepts all at once. They often do a very poor job of
> > explaining why they force you to do things their way, and just tell you
> to
> > do them.
> >
> > While the Scala language technically lets you program in a way similar
> to
> > Java, but with advanced features as needed, the libraries are written in
> a
> > way to make this nearly impossible.
> >
> > What all this means is that a developer from any traditional OOP
> language,
> > or less complex language is going to have a very very hard time learning
> > Scala, and in the end the time you lost learning won't make up for any
> > advantage Scala's 'way' provides.
> >
> > As long as the Scala community is so obtuse and focused on being right
> > their
> > way, as opposed to helping developers get into the language, Scala will
> > remain a nitch language.