The documentation of scala macro is very hard to understand, so I think it must have some background knowledge if one wants to use it in real case.
And I ask help for what these knowledge are.
c.Expr[Unit](Block(treesWithSeparators.toList, Literal(Constant(()))))
it is a code snippet of macro, and there are little info available for what Block means, and other similar terms. It is hard to go deep in if these key points lost.
So if anyone knows where exists a more detailed documentation or tutorial, please tell me, thanks:)
It is hard to go deep in if these key points lost.
Yes that is true but it is good that not everyone can get a way into macros. They are a powerful feature and users that don't understand them fully should not use them.
Diving into macros requires a lot of self learning, there is no easy way to learn how they work and how to work with them.
Nevertheless there is already a lot of useful documentation out there. For example this question wants to know how to understand the AST: Where can I learn about constructing AST's for Scala macros?
This question on the other side gives some value on how to work with reify: What's the easiest way to use reify (get an AST of) an expression in Scala?
On docs.scala-lang.org there is an excellent overview available that describes what macros can do and what not. The official homepage also contains lots of useful information.
And reading further questions here on StackOverflow, looking at source code on GitHub or searching the web for blog posts on macros shouldn't be that difficult.
For the beginning this should be enough to find a way into macro hell.
Related
I want to learn Lift. Unfortunately, all documentation which I tried either obsolete, unreadable, incorrect or combination of the above. I tried the following:
Simlply Lift. Some things from the book I tried lead to errors.
Exploring Lift. The structure of book is very bad. It's hard to read and try out code in the wild at the same time.
Lift in Action. The same as the previous but you need to pay for it.
P.S. I've seen similar questions. Most of them were asked a long time ago. Did the situation improve from the time of that writings?
P.P.S. Are there any other type safe scala web frameworks (Don't offer Play 2.0. It's not typesafe. I don't see any reason to create it in Scala).
It is unfortunately true that the state of Lift documentation is uneven at best and there are huge gaping holes.
However, the Lift community is just full of awesomely helpful people.
My recommendation is not to play around, but rather to try and implement something. If you get stuck, ask specific, direct questions about what you're trying to do, how you're doing it and why it isn't working.
So far, though I would wish for better documentation, I've been able to get every answer that I needed either through Google or on the Lift mailing list - though I expect I might ask more questions here in the future.
The Lift documentation is not its strong point. The philosophy is more "try and ask if you have any problem". Here are a few tips:
Assembla
One ressource that is really useful is http://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb, there are a lots of examples so you can progressively learn how it works.
Mailing List
Otherwise you can always use the mailing list if you have specific questions even if in my opinion it is really hard to explore it fast in order to solve a problem which was already encountered. http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb
Stack Overflow
Finally, a small community is present on Stackoverflow so feel free to ask in here. This is a good way of looking for answers and creating documentation in the same time.
Source code
Don't hesitate to explore the source code and the scaladoc if you have specific questions/doubts about the behavior of a function, they are often short and even sometimes commented! http://scala-tools.org/mvnsites/liftweb-2.4-M4/#package
Have a look at the Lift Cookbook: http://cookbook.liftweb.net/
"Simlply Lift. Some things from the book I tried lead to errors."
What exact type of errors did you have? Have you tried to follow it with "Simply Lift" examples that you can download from GitHub
https://github.com/dpp/simply_lift?
Only errors I had were related to my lack of experience with SBT, but that's another story.
I have started with Lift mostly from that source (Simply Lift + examples) and in combination with its great community and Google (ChrisJamesC has listed the main links really nice) it was quite okay for me.
I would suggest you to work out all examples given in the "Simply Lift" tutorial or at least work them out unless you feel comfortable enough to jump right "in media res" and try something by yourself. That was the best way of learning Lift for me.
Also, whenever you got stuck somewhere and can't find solution on the web, your questions would be welcome and answered on the Lift Google Group (https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!forum/liftweb). David Pollak is very often right there to answer your questions directly so I have only words of praise for this framework's community and Lift's
creator.
P.S. Lift's documentation could be better organized, some stuff could be better explained for sure, but IMHO it was just too small a price I had to pay to enjoy such beautiful framework. Learning curve is steeper than with Play, especially in the beginning, but after I "survived" the very first week it was almost impossible for me to give up of all of its advantages and original concepts (Lift's "Seven Things") and switch to another framework.
Despite having read "Programming in Scala" several times, I still often finds important Scala constructs that were not explained in the book, like
#uncheckedVariance
#specialized
and other strange constructs like
new { ... } // No class name!
and so on.
I find this rather frustrating, considering that the book was written by the Scala "inventor" himself, and others.
I tried to read the language specification, but it's made for academics, rather than practicing programmers. It made my head spin.
Is there a website for "Everything "Programming in Scala" Didn't Tell You" ?
There was the daily-scala Blog, but it died over a year ago.
Currently, we're working on a central documentation site for scala-lang.org. We're hoping that this solves a lot of the documentation issues that new users face. More details on this effort can be found at http://heather.miller.am/blog/2011/07/improving-scala-documentation/, but in summary...
Believe it or not, there are a lot of documents that the Scala team has produced but which simply aren't in HTML or are otherwise difficult to find. Such as Martin's new Collections API, his document on Arrays, or Adriaan's on Type Constructor Inference.
One goal of such a site is to collect all of this documentation in one place, in a searchable, organized, and easy-to-navigate format.
Another goal is to collect excellent community documentation out there, and to put it in the same place as well. For that, we are actively looking for quality (article/overview-like) material with maintainers. Examples include the Scala Style Guide, and Daniel Spiewak's Scala for Java Refugees.
Yet another goal is to make it easy for contributors to participate- so the site is built from RST source, which will live in a documentation-only github repo at https://github.com/scala/scala-docs.
So, in short, something better is on it's way, and contributors are very welcome to participate.
EDIT: http://docs.scala-lang.org is now live.
Several documents considered to be rather detailed or even obscure are already available. This includes all "Scala Improvement Proposals" (the proposals produced when new language features are suggested, and which are usually very detailed, and written by the implementers themselves). Also available is the entire glossary from Programming in Scala, Scala cheatsheets, amongst many other documents. The bottom-line of the site is to be community-focused and contribution-friendly-- so, free, and totally open. Suggested topics to cover are also welcome.
Take a look at scalaz and typelevel librairies (shapeless, spire, etc.), they rely on many advanced features of Scala.
*scalaz was for a time part of typelevel, but it is no more the case.
Josh Sureth's book goes a little beyond the usual. It's not as far as I'd like but I'm not his core audience - still, there's a lot of good stuff in there.
http://www.manning.com/suereth
Scala IRC: irc://irc.freenode.net/scala
Scala forum: http://scala-forum.org/
Blogs: Just look at http://planetscala.com/
Programming Scala (Wampler, Payne): http://ofps.oreilly.com/titles/9780596155957/
Programming in Scala (Odersky, Venners, Spoon) - good but Scala 2.8: http://www.artima.com/pins1ed/
The new documentation page is online:
http://docs.scala-lang.org/
I've kept a library of advanced Scala resources, primarily talks and blog posts. It's updated pretty regularly as I find new, interesting content.
Happy to add new links to it if anyone has recommendations.
Try to read SBT Source: https://github.com/harrah/xsbt/wiki
Its a good exercise. Also check out the book 'scala in depth' : http://www.manning.com/suereth/ by
Joshua D. Suereth
I believe there are a lot of good answer here. But as a sharing of experience. I have been coding Scala for 2 year (not my full time job), and been progressively better at it. My project is 97% Scala, and I have been able to do most of it with:
Programming Scala
The scala-user list
Stackoverflow
This cover most of the need for the "user" side of Scala, meaning all you need to create working application. However if you want to write some more complex code, or create powerful typed libraries you definitely need more.
If you want to go beyond the basics and are prepared to delve deeply into type system, and libraries, then the alternatives I use:
Use the community, scala enthusiast are really nice. I have worked with folks form Specs, Scalaz and Lift.
IRC is really good and some of the core contributors to some of the big library frequently show up.
Jump to source code, but don't try to understand everything. Scala type system can be daunting, however you normally don't need to understand 100% of it to use it.
If you really need to get into the nitty gritty details, hit the language specs, development list, and get to know the key people.
However you can really be very effective in Scala without needing to understand every single bit of the language.
I am currently implementing a small compiler in Scala and while I was doing the component for context analysis I discovered the trait Binders in package scala.util.parsing.ast (I am using Scala 2.9 RC), which is Documented to enable name binding during parse time. That sounds very interesting and I have been googling around a lot, but I still have no clue how to use it. While I am of course able to let my abstract syntax derrive from Binders I dont see how to proceed from there. Are there any examples of the usage on the net?
By googling a bit I found this page, which seems to be a development version of a documentation with more details. Unfortunately I was not able to find online (I mean, outside a source repository) version of these documentations.
I'm not sure however that you will find what you're looking for in this library. Name resolution is a rather delicate thing, and it smells like a questionable idea to do it during parsing. The documentation of this library itself highlights that it is only suitable for languages where the name resolution is relatively simple, and may not scale otherwise. Besides, none of the parsing examples in the Scala repository make use of this class.
I would cautiously avoid this uncharted territory, and design binding analysis in a separate post-parsing pass.
You're not supposed to use it. In fact, it has recently been deprecated.
See
deprecation candidate: scala.parsing.ast
I recently became part of a complex embedded project team for which I will be developing a part. For the part which is my responsibility there is only old code and not much documentation.
I am keen to make a good start but shyness and fear of appearing stupid makes it difficult to ask questions. How to ask questions ?
I wanted to ask what techniques do you guys use to understand a project ? I mean there are of lots of technical details which one must remember and keep in context in order to make a design. Your read the code and get some facts but how to move ahead ?
For instance you read the code and the document(s) and get some facts A and fact B . How to reach suitable conclusion X for which you may or may not have needed to take into account facts C and D also ?
Code-reading can be particularly difficult if there is not enough documentation and the code is poorly documented and badly written. I guess the best way now is to find the entry point of the code, and slowly understand its flows and what data it uses. I would keep a look out for
Structure - are there any partitioning of entities/system? Where in the code (and how) do they communicate with each other?
Data - what sort of structures are used to hold the global data? How are the data accessed and saved?
If you are doing C or C++, it is also important to find out how memory is handled and for C++ (and other related non-managed memory OOP languages, I guess), how are object ownership contained.
Since it is an embedded project, are there any non-standard code or coding constructs used?
Reading the code is balanced by writing the documentation.
Write the documentation that your replacement will need. Imagine someone who knows less than you. Explain it for that person.
When you cannot explain something to your replacement, ask questions.
When you have a complete description, you will "know" the system.
And you will have produced complete documentation.
You don't mention what kind of tests exist. If there are test cases, modify them and trace how this would affect the end result.
You might want to look at diagrams which give the entire picture of the logical structure of the system, like, for example, looking at class diagrams in an OOP system would be of great help. Looking at the design diagrams of large and complex apps gives you a clear understanding of how the internal modules of the system are organized and this way its makes the task of figuring out what functionality does a particular piece of code does much much easier. In the absence of diagrams, you're best bet would be to start from the entry point of the app, like main() and proceed from there while you draw(literally draw or write down on paper) your own conclusions about the system(this way you can have your own documentation) and ask your peers if they're correct.
My experience is that it's best to start with some kind of task -- a bug fix or other small change. That will provide focus to your learning. I find it hard to read through a binder or sift through pages of source code or documentation without having a way to apply it.
If you have a sandbox where you can play with changes that you've made without messing up the code base, that can be even more helpful.
I've been asked to run a workshop and coding dojo soon for people to try out Scala and try to build something with it. The attendees are all going to be new to Scala, and could come from any of a number of languages (I'm presuming they can code in at least one mainstream language - I'm including syntax comparisons with Java, C#, Python and Ruby).
Part of the appeal of Scala is that it's practical - you can use it as a drop-in "power Java" (Java with less syntactical clutter, closures, immutability, FP, traits, singleton objects, nifty XML handling, type inference etc.) that still runs on the JVM (and on the .NET CLR supposedly) and doesn't require you to change build tools, server infrastructure, libraries, IDEs and so on. Most of the katas I've seen have been fun but not 'real world' - mathematical challenges like Project Euler and so on. These don't seem appropriate as we're trying to explore the use of it as a practical, real world language that people could consider using for both hacking and work, and because people aren't necessarily going to be too familiar with either the deeper parts of the Scala syntax or necessarily of the concepts behind functional programming.
So, has anyone come across any more practical, everyday katas rather than arithmetical 'problem solving' ones? Katas, that is, that can test whether the language, libraries and tools can satisfy the use cases of the actual day-to-day programming most people have to do rather than testing out. (Not that the impractical ones aren't fun, but just not appropriate for the kind of thing I've been asked to run.)
If I can't find good examples, I'm thinking that it might be useful to try and build something like a library catalogue - the event is for programmers who primarily work on building infrastructure for universities (and in education and culture - museums, galleries, schools, libraries and so on). It's a bit boring though, but it's the sort of thing that the attendees work on in their day-to-day existence. Any suggestions?
There is a creative commons licensed introductory training course with hands-on exercises here:
http://github.com/javaBin/scala-training-slides
http://github.com/javaBin/scala-training-code
The slides are in Open Office format. If you don't have this installed, you can upload them to SlideShare, which will convert them for online viewing.
Most of the programming examples in my blog are, effectively, coding dojo exercises. Particularly the matrices series, but also the puzzles and 99 beers. Now, don't disregard the matrices series as being "mathematical", because the problems I concern myself in it are related to the construction of classes in Scala, not to doing fancy algorithms. In fact, I pretty much skip over the mathematical algorithms themselves.
Now, 99 Scala Problems and pretty much everything from Project Euler are nice exercises for the functional part of Scala, but I understand that not to be your emphasis. I do recommend retronym's answer. Rosetta Code, not being functionally oriented, might have more general examples. There are many with Scala examples, of course, though you may wish to consider other tasks as well, for ideas.
There's lot of cool things to learn about Scala, but one has to be careful at beginner level. For instance, I would not speak of dependency injection (self types and the cake pattern) or of type classes (the pattern that simulates such with implicits).
Do look as well at the material on the Scala Lang site, particularly the Scala by Example document.
EDIT
I have now overseen several Scala dojos, so here's a bit of stuff I've learned from then:
Problems: they have to be fun, not-quite-easy, not-that-hard, and that has to be everyone's opinion.
We use the Dojo Puzzles site, which is in Portuguese so it won't be of use for most people here. If there's a similar site in English, I'd love to hear about it.
The way it works is you ask for a random problem, look it over and discuss to see if you'll pick it up or not, and then indicate by saying you'll use it, you'll not use it, or maybe you'll use it but you'd like to see another one. This vote gets registered and you can see how many people picked up a problem, which helps deciding whether to pick it up or not in first place.
Scala knowledge: it turns out it's not that important to introduce key concepts of Scala language beforehand, particularly if some of the participants have basic knowledge.
In my experience, setting up the testing environment with a trivial "pass" test and explaining how people should write the tests is often enough to get people started. If you feel someone is struggling to write something, give a quick explanation and get on with it.
Teaching Scala: if you do set out to teach Scala, keep lessons short and follow up with a dojo. In this case, keep a set of dojo problems that are adequate to the lesson, and, depending on how many lessons you want in one day, short.
It helps imposing artificial constraints on how one must solve a problem. Some examples of constraints I have put in practice are no classes and single-expression methods (that is, no multiple statements or val/var declarations). The point of these constraints is making it impossible for people to solve the problem in the way they are used to, which gets them to explore the language in search of alternatives.
I have the final results of three dojos done at my current job in this repository.
At the moment we are using the Randori Kata format, but without fixed time or break, and with retrospective at the end of the dojo, not at the beginning of the next. This, however, is just were we are currently at -- we have experimented many variations, and we are still evolving.
Perhaps you could have a look at the Ruby Quiz material for inspiration.
Take a look at Scala by example from Martin Odersky (creator of scala)