[radu_floricica]

I can tell why I (a java programmer who slowly moves to Clojure) didn't go the Scala route. Because every time I've seen code sample comparisons, the clojure one was shorter then the java original and the scala was longer. Plus it's foreign enough from java... so if I do it, better to go all the way and make it worth it.

[viraptor]

I'm surprised how is that even possible? You can probably translate every Java file, line-by-line into Scala. Then remove the redundant type declarations and you're already shorter. Then you can actually rewrite it to something less imperative and still shorter.

Do you have any real examples of longer Scala code? I couldn't find any.

[viraptor]

Well downvoting instead of providing an example to the claim is a bit cheap...

[radu_floricica]

As I didn't delve into scala I can't really offer examples. But this was the impression I was left with when reading code samples 2-3 years ago. I think it was collections-related? I know it doesn't make much sense, and I do intend to revisit scala sometimes, but this is the impression me, a novelty-seeking programmer was left with when researching jvm languages.

[Roybatty]

Kotlin will cure the Scala curse. Scala is history...no matter what Odersky and pals try to recover it from. Scala is history...it's time to market and bad perception...adios..

Kotlin will be the successor to Java.