[zmoazeni]

I agree with the you. While it's mean, I dislike the current state of the Java community for the reasons zeemonkee stated in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2793472

The tough part about languages like Scala and Clojure is that the existing Java ecosystem bleeds through heavily. For instance, while Scala boils away a lot of repetitious code, it's still there under the hood. It feels like an architectural band-aid. That may change as the ecosystem around each language evolves and writes frameworks and libraries in Scala/Clojure rather than reusing them from Java. However in Scala's case it's as if the language is being marketed as the next evolution of Java-as-a-language with a heavy emphasis on reusing existing Java frameworks and libraries, so I expect the people writing code in the existing Java community to migrate to Scala.

Elitest? Maybe. But I think it's a realistic view.

The newer JVM languages are great if you already have an existing Java codebase, however I'm struggling to find sound reasons to use Scala on a geen field project.

[gclaramunt]

Don't underestimate the JVM ecosystem, plus you have 15 years of optimization in the VM...

[diolpah]

"For instance, while Scala boils away a lot of repetitious code, it's still there under the hood. It feels like an architectural band-aid"

I don't understand this argument. Even so-called elegant languages like Scheme still have 'repetitious' MOV, JNE, etc instructions under the hood. Unless you're running on a lisp machine, everything you write executes very repetitiously in machine language under the hood.

Why make a distinction between one abstraction and another? All of them are architectural band-aids, to use your parlance.