Scalariform VS Wartremover

Compare Scalariform vs Wartremover and see what are their differences.

Our great sponsors
  • WorkOS - The modern identity platform for B2B SaaS
  • InfluxDB - Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale
  • SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews
Scalariform Wartremover
- 6
112 1,059
- -0.3%
0.0 8.8
about 8 years ago 9 days ago
Scala Scala
MIT License Apache License 2.0
The number of mentions indicates the total number of mentions that we've tracked plus the number of user suggested alternatives.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.

Scalariform

Posts with mentions or reviews of Scalariform. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects.

We haven't tracked posts mentioning Scalariform yet.
Tracking mentions began in Dec 2020.

Wartremover

Posts with mentions or reviews of Wartremover. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2023-05-08.
  • Is Scala to Java the same relationship as TypeScript has with ECMAScript?
    2 projects | /r/scala | 8 May 2023
    By contrast, Java and ECMAScript are essentially what we might call "classical" imperative OOP languages, although ECMAScript reveals much more of its Lisp-inspired "map/filter/reduce" FP roots. IMO ESLint is essentially table stakes for working with ECMAScript, but honestly, I wouldn't stop there and would insist on working in TypeScript, including some of the tooling for ESLint specifically for TypeScript, dialing type-safety up to 11, effectively like using Wart Remover with Scala.
  • Scala Resurrection
    6 projects | /r/scala | 24 Jan 2023
    I'm awed by the maturity of the Scala 2 compiler. Every minor version in the 2.13 series adds a new linting improvement. You can see that if you have sbt-tpolecat in your project. I'm always happy to see that some option from Wartremover is no longer used.
  • New to Scala;
    8 projects | /r/scala | 14 Oct 2022
    I was recently trying to move away from Scapegoat to Wartremover and I got bitten by this bug which is particularly prevalent in codebases using Typelevel libraries.
  • Which static analysis tool do you use for Scala?
    8 projects | /r/scala | 12 Jan 2022
    There is also wartremover but you cannot run it separately from your compile command.
  • Newspeak and Domain Modeling
    4 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 29 Jun 2021
    or `NonUnitStatements` without explicit annotation.

    This effectively locks you into writing pure code (you can extend the linter to cover other things like not using `Future` or not using Java libs outside of `MonadError` from cats[4]). The linters operate on typed ASTs at compile time, and have plugins for the most popular scala build tools. Coupled with `-XFatalWarnings', you can guarantee that nothing unexpected happens unless you explicitly pop the escape hatch, for the most part.

    You can still bring in external libraries that haven't been compiled with these safties in place, so you aren't completely safe, but if you use ZIO[5]/Typelevel[6] libraries you can be reasonably assured of referentially transparent code in practice.

    There are three schools of thought, roughly, in the scala community towards the depth of using the type system and linters to provide guarantees and capabilities, currently:

    1) Don't attempt to do this, it makes the barrier to entry to high for Scala juniors. I don't understand this argument - you want to allow runtime footguns you could easily prevent at compile time because the verifiable techniques take time to learn? Why did you even choose to use a typesafe language and pay the compilation time penalty that comes with it?

    2) Abstract everything to the smallest possible dependency interface, including effects (code to an effect runtime, F[_] that implements the methods your code needs to run - if you handle errors, F implements MonadError, if you output do concurrent things, F implements Concurrent, etc.) and you extend the effect with your own services using tagless final or free.

    3) You still use effect wrappers, but you bind the whole project always to use a concrete effect type, avoiding event abstraction, thus making it easier to code, and limiting footguns to a very particular subset (mainly threadpool providers and unsafeRun or equivalent being called eagerly in the internals of applications).

    My opinion is that smallest interface with effect guarantees (#2) is best for very large, long maintenance window apps where thechoice of effect runtime might change(app), or is out of the devs' control (lib); and #3 is best for small apps.

    TL/DR; You can go a really, really long way to guaranteeing effects don't run in user code in scala. Not all the way like Haskell, but far enough that it's painful to code without conforming to referential transparency.

    1. https://github.com/scalacenter/scalafix

    2. https://github.com/scalaz/scalazzi

    3. http://www.wartremover.org/

    4. https://typelevel.org/cats/api/cats/MonadError.html

    5. https://zio.dev/

    6. https://typelevel.org/

What are some alternatives?

When comparing Scalariform and Wartremover you can also consider the following projects:

scalafmt - This repo is now a fork of --->

Scapegoat - Scala compiler plugin for static code analysis

Scalastyle - scalastyle

Scalafix - Refactoring and linting tool for Scala

scalajs-benchmark - Benchmarks: write in Scala or JS, run in your browser. Live demo:

Linter - Static Analysis Compiler Plugin for Scala

Scurses - Scurses, terminal drawing API for Scala, and Onions, a Scurses framework for easy terminal UI