Shapeless
Ammonite-Ops
Our great sponsors
Shapeless | Ammonite-Ops | |
---|---|---|
12 | 14 | |
3,315 | 2,547 | |
- | 0.2% | |
8.0 | 8.7 | |
7 days ago | 6 days ago | |
Scala | Scala | |
Apache License 2.0 | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
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.
Shapeless
-
Fp libraries that target scala 3 exclusively?
I know that libraries like Scodec and shapeless were rewritten practically from scratch for Scala 3, taking advantage of the next syntax and internals, as well as protoquill - a Scala 3 implementation of Quill.
-
Delphi 11 Alexandria Has Been Released
please show me something like this: https://akka.io/ or this: https://zio.dev/ or this: https://github.com/milessabin/shapeless
-
6 Years of Professional Clojure
That largely depends on the type system. Languages like Haskell and Scala which have much more powerful type systems than C/Java/Go/etc absolutely do allow you to do those sorts of things. It is a bit harder to wrap your head around to be sure and there are some rough edges, but once you get the hang of it you can get the benefits of static typing with the flexibility of dynamic typing. See https://github.com/milessabin/shapeless or a project that I've been working on a lot lately https://github.com/zio/zio-schema.
-
Scala3: Does it provide a simplified way of doing n-term generic parameters?
Just use cats and use the apply syntax .mapN for this. Seriously. There isn't a way to do it without generating source code that I can see in the api. Scala 3's HList Tuples aren't like Shapeless 2's HLists and I can't figure out a way in the api to reduce the tuple members down from (A, B, C, D) into an E, generically, yet with Scala 3 poly functions, unlike what you could do in Shapeless 2 with HList
-
Scala: A Love Story
Scala has sparked a huge ecosystem of very high quality libraries (Cats, Scalaz, shapeless, to name but a few). I think a major reason for this is that Scala attracts developers who value the advantages of the JVM, but are fed up with the limitations of the Java programming language and understand the benefits of an expressive type system and functional programming.
-
Jam 0.0.4 got Scala 3 support
I also investigated shapeless3 macroses: https://github.com/milessabin/shapeless/tree/shapeless-3/modules, but they are more about derivation than reflection. And probably that is all I found.
-
Why Learn Haskell?
I'm not sure where is the line between extensive and basic knowledge. Here is my more detailed exposure:
In commercial context:
* Of strongly typed ones only Scala (with [shapeless]). Can reluctantly throw in Kotlin as well for it's amazing structured concurrency.
In non-commercial context:
* Went through a few chapters of [Software Foundations] doing Coq proofs.
* Worked through most of the [Types and Programming Languages] (writing typecheckers in Ocaml)
* 3 services in Haskell (1 on Scotty, 2 on Servant). Loved persistent+esqueleto for the ORM layer, disliked Opaleye.
* 2 projects in PureScript (1 with Halogen, 1 with React bindings).
* 1 project in ReasonML (Ocaml).
-
> I am afraid there is no way back for me
I see where you are coming from. In my case I can alternate between "I want all invariants properly expressed and checked" and "I just want to ship that barely-working piece of junk and iterate on it". I learned to adjust depending on organization needs. IMO, for many orgs, especially startups/scaleups, the latter is often the more fitting way. With that in mind, I'm willing to trade the guiding hand of great type systems for other productivity aspects (amazing runtime and cohesive web framework in Elixir's case).
[shapeless]: https://github.com/milessabin/shapeless
[Software Foundations]: https://softwarefoundations.cis.upenn.edu/
[Types and Programming Languages]: https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/tapl/
Ammonite-Ops
-
Scala Isn't Fun Anymore
That's funny, because this is what I really like about Scala; how quick and easy it is to get a project started.
> sbt new scala/scala3.g8
will just create an empty project. If you don't even want to bother with a project, use use scala-cli or ammonite (http://ammonite.io/) to just start banging out code.
Even the upgrading of a project from Scala2 to Scala3 is a breeze, thanks to very good backwards compatibility of new library releases.
- A Python-compatible statically typed language erg-lang/erg
-
Scala 3 Reflection
Scripting API is quite limited, so the third option. - reuse the ammonite scripts https://github.com/com-lihaoyi/Ammonite or look how this is implemented (using internal compiler API),
-
Audacity Fork Without Any Sentry Telemetry or Crash Reporting
Here's an example of a smaller project that added telemetry without suffering a fork:
-
Scripting with Java – Improving Approachability
Or ammonite - I've ran Gatling performance test from a simple script based on this gist it fetches all the dependencies, compiles and runs the test, producing nice html report..
-
25 years of OCaml
Scala with the Typelevel ecosystem. Stay on the jVM, but have a much more pleasant and robust experience, including a great REPL.
-
The Scala ecosystem and circular dependencies?
If you are installing, and you are learning, I would also recommend ammonite as an easier REPL.
-
IPython as a System Shell
I've been using amm on and off https://ammonite.io/#Ammonite-Shell
pretty nice if you know scala, still have to use regular shell(s) so I do not forget them
-
A Lisp REPL as my main shell
I've never tested Ammonite, only read the https://ammonite.io/#Ammonite-Shell, so I'm only guessing here.
From what I understand, Ammonite was designed as a "readline shell" as I wrote in the article. It perpetuates this approach that everything is a command.
The thesis of my article suggests we do the opposite: I'm suggesting to rethink shells by starting from the interface (here the SLY REPL) and then implement the shell features.
In particular, it seems that Ammonite does not support back-references and I'm not sure it has an interactive inspector.
While Ammonite seems to be a definite improvement over the _syntax_ of Bash, etc., I'm not sure it brings much novelty in terms of user interface. But again, I know very little about it so I may have missed some features :)
I wonder what people think about Ammonite (https://ammonite.io/)?
It's not Lisp but Scala so may not be the authors language of choice however it can be used as a Shell: https://ammonite.io/#Ammonite-Shell
I am personally using it and compared to a classical shell like Bash it's really nice for more structured data related tasks (exploring some API, checking some data, creating a bunch of PRs at once, ...).
It also makes use of Scala's adjustable syntax and functional concepts so you basically get shell piping but in a strongly typed fashion (e.g.
What are some alternatives?
cats - Lightweight, modular, and extensible library for functional programming.
magnolia - Easy, fast, transparent generic derivation of typeclass instances
Monocle - Optics library for Scala
Scalaz - Principled Functional Programming in Scala
Chimney - Scala library for boilerplate-free, type-safe data transformations
better-files - Simple, safe and intuitive Scala I/O
scala-newtype - NewTypes for Scala with no runtime overhead
scala.meta - Library to read, analyze, transform and generate Scala programs
refined - Refinement types for Scala
Scala Graph - Graph for Scala is intended to provide basic graph functionality seamlessly fitting into the Scala Collection Library. Like the well known members of scala.collection, Graph for Scala is an in-memory graph library aiming at editing and traversing graphs, finding cycles etc. in a user-friendly way.
calculator - Windows Calculator: A simple yet powerful calculator that ships with Windows