Skip to main content

Creating something concrete with Scala

Since I attended a course on functional programming with Scala at Coursera (see previous posts) I've been having a idea to make something concrete with Scala. Having only minimal experience with Scala I decided to try something simple with well known Scala libraries.

The project


First I'll try to create a simple todo application that saves all the data to a some database (maria, redis, mongo) and the tasks are managed via REST-service.

Once I've done that I have two ideas what to do after that. I'll either try to create some sort of UI that uses the REST-service or I'll extend the simple todo application to a Kanban board type of application and try to create the UI after that.

I haven't decided with what I'll be creating the UI since I'm not that familiar with current frontend technologies so that'll be decided later.

First try


At first I tried to create a REST-service with spray but that didn't work. Maybe it's just me but to me the spray documentation was incomplete, I also tried out sprays examples from github and had them running via sbt but not with Scala IDE. The examples ran with sbt but when I tried to create my own REST implementation based on the examples the service never responded. Trying to make this simple service to respond to me with no luck for several hours I decided that I'm not going to use spray.

Second try


This is still on my todo list but next I'll try create the REST-service with Play 2 hopefully with better results.

Impressions now


Trying to create something with a new language and new libraries can be difficult and in case of Scala and spray it seems to be true. Though this isn't true to all languages, I remember a project where we created a REST-service with Grails with absolutely no experience with Groovy or Grails and that was a walk in the park compared to my experiences so far with Scala and spray.
Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Simple code: Naming things

There are two hard things in programming and naming is one them. If you don't believe me ask Martin Fowler https://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/TwoHardThings.html . In this post I'll be covering some general conventions for naming things to improve readability and understandabilty of the code. There are lots of things that need a name in programming. Starting from higher abstractions to lower we need to name a project, API or library, we probably need to name the source code repository, when we get to the code we need to name our modules or packages, we give names to classes, objects, interfaces and in those we name our functions or methods and within those we name our variables. Overall a lot of things to name. TLDR; Basic rule There's a single basic convention to follow to achiveve better, more descriptive naming of things. Give it a meaningful name i.e. don't use shorthands like gen or single letter variables like a, x, z instead tell what it represents, what it does...
Read more

DIY home automation, new generation

I've had my DIY home automation system for controlling outlets and reading sensor data running for about two years now. The system has been working fine and I haven't had any need to touch the code since I added the sensor reading to it, until a few months back. Need for new functionality Few months ago I got a new IoT toy for a lend from a friend until I'd get my own toys, a ruuvitag sensor beacon. Ever since I found the ruuvitag for the first time from kickstarter I had the idea of getting a bunch of ruuvitags and adding their weather station sensor readings as part of my home automation system. The original home automation backend included only tellstick compatible devices and was written in Python, and in my mind it was kind of a hack. The ruuvitag beacons communicate via BLE i.e. Bluetooth Low Energy and that meant that I needed to add functionality to read the beacon data via bluetooth. I found a ruuvitag Python library and initially thought that I'd just...
Read more

Simple code: Unit tests

Unit tests are the developers number one safety net. Let that sink in. This is the number one reason for writing unit tests. Unit tests are written by developers for developers to ensure that the code works as expected and handles happy and sad paths correctly. With enough unit test coverage the tests enable a safe environment for refactoring and rewriting code. Unit test scope Unit test should test a single thing, a method or function call and it should test only one use case within. In other words a unit test should test a function with a single input. This is a important guideline to understand. When a unit test tests a function with single input it makes the test isolated, repeatable and predictable. Example of good tests: @Test fun findsAddress() {   val address = findAddress("Stevens street 35", "Southport", "Australia")   assertThat(address).isNotNull() } @Test fun doesNotFindAddress() {   val address = findAddress("Stevens street 697", ...
Read more