[pkolaczk]

Why so angry? I pointed to one obvious limitation of Kotlin null handling compared to Scala and you're attacking the whole language. Scala and Kotlin both have their place and they are not direct competitors at all, because they have different goals and address different groups of programmers, despite Kotlin drawing actually a lot from Scala. It is actually quite funny, when features in Kotlin are presented as making the language more productive, yet the very same features in Scala are presented as an example of "Scala being baroque abomination".

[edem]

What makes you think I'm angry? I thought that scala was an abomination long before Kotlin came to existence. And I usually compare it to clojure which not only tries but succeeds at being a functional language and on the expressivity scale nothing gets near a lisp dialect. Your comment added no value and you obviously despise Kotlin. From what I see in the city I live: 80% of scala projects fail to deliver and never get to production. The older projects which survive suffer from the slow compiler and the binary incompatibility. Not to mention the arbitrary use of all the tacked-on features by scala devs which makes streamlining code style frustrating from both sides.

[pkolaczk]

"What makes you think I'm angry?"

The wording you used and the fact that your post was a completely off-topic opinion, just to attack the language you don't like. We're discussing various null-safety approaches here, not opinions about which language is better. That Kotlin can't treat optional types as any other monad (e.g. Either or Try monads) unlike Haskell, Scala and probably half a dozen other languages is a fact, not opinion. Also baking optional types into the syntax and the type system makes them language more complex and this is also a fact.

> 80% of scala projects fail to deliver [citation needed]