[ebiester]

Implicits, SBT being anything but simple, and compile times. :) People have suggested sticking to a subset of Scala for most purposes, but what happens when you run into a problem with a library? Suddenly, you're diving into Slick (from a friend's example) or Play (from a personal, painful example) and can't make heads or tails of the code because of how different the paradigm is.

Frankly, I'd rather just go to Erlang and skip all the compromises needed to stay with the JVM if I want that kind of language.

[saryant]

What did you find painful about Play? I've dived into its internals a number of times, including to submit a performance fix a few months ago, and I've found it to be quite easy to understand.

[frowaway001]

What's wrong with implicits?

[Ygg2]

Magic.

[frowaway001]

... done right?

I mean the most hated implicits are implicit conversions and they basically exist for Java compatibility.¹

So on the one side you have terrible stuff hard-coded into the language (Java, C#) which you will never get rid of and on the other side you have a solution as a library which you just can de-import if you don't want to suffer from e. g. magic anything-to-String conversions any longer (I certainly won't).

That's a huge plus in my book.

¹ The two other main use cases, type classes and extension methods, seem to be hugely popular and I haven't seen any criticism concerning them.