Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
I mean, I love akka, and I love FP. I'd encourage the FP route for actor model in most cases, but typed/class-oriented can be easier if you are used to OOP.
FP isn't really hard, it's just rigorous. You're defining types and states they go through in your application rather than data with operations. The end going being to make your software "provable."
@SortOfTested Yes. Actually I was amazed how natural Akka felt (except for some Java*isms).
My pain point with the Akka examples was the Java concept of nested classes (totally forgot to mention, oopsie).
It's... for me a broken concept.
My brain went into panic state because I read Command multiple times without realizing that the nested class (eg DeviceGroup.Command) was meant...
I must read about that part at the weekend, because I actually don't want to go that way... It reminds me too much of PHP class goo (one file... Oh so many classes).
Otherwise, I think FP and I are somehow already friends.
I always liked OOP design mixed with elements of FP. My DTOs are value objects, hence not mutable. My actors never mutate inner variables, only initialize them. Everything "in" and "out" are DTOs / value objects...
(one very painful lesson from PHP - as in a loosely typed language mutating stuff can lead to a hell of lobotomy, since even changing the type is possible, which leads to a nightmare of debugging)