Jon Pretty

Most of this boilerplate will be hidden behind standard libraries like Cats and ZIO-prelude, so users will almost never have to define their own derivations. This is a good thing for adopting typeclasses in Scala as first-class citizens, rather than a mix of features.

IntelliJ support for Scala 3 could be better. I had to juggle between : and = for definitions. Some common refactorings/create-from-usage aren't supported properly yet. The editor still throws a bunch of errors randomly. This will be improved as usage increases.

BTW the top level image is actual compiling Scala 3 code - no imports, no main object. Top-level functions are a huge win!

So Scala 3 is basically statically typed Python with embellishments. Yucksies.

The braceless syntax is totally optional. The rest? I'd rather have a statically-typed Python than a poor Haskell imitation.

And I really can’t get behind the “poor Haskell” claim. Inspired by, sure, but that’s like saying JS is a “poor Scheme”. It misses fundamental differences and doesn’t do justice to either fan base

That I agree with. I have long maintained that Scala is neither "better-java" or "worse-haskell". It's Scala. It should be used like Scala. However, Scala 2 does suffer from feature envy, and Scala 3 improves that significantly.

I would love to agree with that sentiment, but I expect the major syntax change to either 1. Pivot the entire ecosystem, alienating existing fans (like me) in favor of broader audiences; or 2. Fracture the ecosystem entirely into two fragile and uncooperative segments