Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–19 of 19 posts

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#11

Post by avinium »

nickpeterson wrote: post #10

F# is great, but MS has decided to kill it through neglect. And the few people paid to work on it spend their time trying to keep it working with the 9000 other changes done to the rest of the tooling.

I think that's not entirely fair. While MS could definitely invest more resources in F#, I wouldn't say it's been neglected (or dying). Just to mention a few developments in recent years: 1) IDE support via Ionide in VS Code 2) Easy install with NuGet 3) cross-platform FSI supported via NET Core 4) some pretty cool updates recently around anonymous records, optional yields, nameof (just to mention a few) 5) no breaking changes (I'm aware of, anyway)

I'd say the future looks pretty bright for F#. It's really resonating with an audience that wants "functional where I want, but practical where I need".

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#12

Post by snagglegaggle »

avinium wrote: post #11
nickpeterson wrote: post #10

F# is great, but MS has decided to kill it through neglect. And the few people paid to work on it spend their time trying to keep it working with the 9000 other changes done to the rest of the tooling.

I think that's not entirely fair. While MS could definitely invest more resources in F#, I wouldn't say it's been neglected (or dying). Just to mention a few developments in recent years: 1) IDE support via Ionide in VS Code 2) Easy install with NuGet 3) cross-platform FSI supported via NET Core 4) some pretty cool updates recently around anonymous records, optional yields, nameof (just to mention a few) 5) no breaki…

I tend to agree with OP. I do see some improvements in F#, but a lot of effort porting those back into C#. I'm not sure if there's any pull away from F# for that effort, but there may be.

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#13

Post by pjmlp »

signal11 wrote: post #9
pjmlp wrote: post #7

Tip, when posting about graphics and visualisation tooling, the first thing I want to see are screenshots and videos, not a wall of text.

The screenshots are in the Gallery link: https://github.com/aardvark-platform/aardvark.docs/wiki/Gall...

Thanks, naturally I have found them before writing my comment.

The point was that on any project related to graphics programming those screenshots should be on the landing page, not necessarily all of them.

It is a question of UX, the first thing everyone usually wants to see is how it looks like, not trying to find out where is the link for examples, if it exists at all.

As for the work itself, it is a great piece of work.

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#14

Post by narimiran »

avinium wrote: post #11
nickpeterson wrote: post #10

F# is great, but MS has decided to kill it through neglect. And the few people paid to work on it spend their time trying to keep it working with the 9000 other changes done to the rest of the tooling.

I think that's not entirely fair. While MS could definitely invest more resources in F#, I wouldn't say it's been neglected (or dying). Just to mention a few developments in recent years: 1) IDE support via Ionide in VS Code 2) Easy install with NuGet 3) cross-platform FSI supported via NET Core 4) some pretty cool updates recently around anonymous records, optional yields, nameof (just to mention a few) 5) no breaki…

> 3) cross-platform FSI supported via NET Core

Last time I tried, I couldn't get FSI working on Linux without Mono. Did something change recently?

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#15

Post by avinium »

narimiran wrote: post #14
avinium wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's not entirely fair. While MS could definitely invest more resources in F#, I wouldn't say it's been neglected (or dying). Just to mention a few developments in recent years: 1) IDE support via Ionide in VS Code 2) Easy install with NuGet 3) cross-platform FSI supported via NET Core 4) some pretty cool updates recently around anonymous records, optional yields, nameof (just to mention a few) 5) no breaki…

> 3) cross-platform FSI supported via NET Core Last time I tried, I couldn't get FSI working on Linux without Mono. Did something change recently?

Yes, this is a recent-ish change. FSI is available under .NET Core 3 Preview, and someone recently mentioned that it's working under 2.2 too.

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#16

Post by pjmlp »

avinium wrote: post #11
nickpeterson wrote: post #10

F# is great, but MS has decided to kill it through neglect. And the few people paid to work on it spend their time trying to keep it working with the 9000 other changes done to the rest of the tooling.

I think that's not entirely fair. While MS could definitely invest more resources in F#, I wouldn't say it's been neglected (or dying). Just to mention a few developments in recent years: 1) IDE support via Ionide in VS Code 2) Easy install with NuGet 3) cross-platform FSI supported via NET Core 4) some pretty cool updates recently around anonymous records, optional yields, nameof (just to mention a few) 5) no breaki…

As long as that audience doesn't need any UI, SQL or application architecture design related Visual Studio tooling.

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#17

Post by avinium »

pjmlp wrote: post #16
avinium wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's not entirely fair. While MS could definitely invest more resources in F#, I wouldn't say it's been neglected (or dying). Just to mention a few developments in recent years: 1) IDE support via Ionide in VS Code 2) Easy install with NuGet 3) cross-platform FSI supported via NET Core 4) some pretty cool updates recently around anonymous records, optional yields, nameof (just to mention a few) 5) no breaki…

As long as that audience doesn't need any UI, SQL or application architecture design related Visual Studio tooling.

In all fairness, I haven't touched Visual Studio (for either F# or C# dev) in at least 18 months, so you're probably right.

That being said, UI isn't a strength on .NET to begin with, so I think it's unfair to point that criticism at F#. Uno seems to doing some great things though.

The F# SQL type provider, however, is great. For those who don't know, this generates design- and compile-time types based on your (live) DB schema, enabling auto-complete and compile-time type checking for SQL queries. I do agree that Ionide/VS Code support isn't quite there yet.

To be perfectly honest, I don't know what you're referring to by "application architecture design".

It's definitely not perfect - I never claimed otherwise. I'm just saying that everything points to MS increasing support for F#, not the opposite.

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#18

Post by pjmlp »

avinium wrote: post #17
pjmlp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as that audience doesn't need any UI, SQL or application architecture design related Visual Studio tooling.

In all fairness, I haven't touched Visual Studio (for either F# or C# dev) in at least 18 months, so you're probably right. That being said, UI isn't a strength on .NET to begin with, so I think it's unfair to point that criticism at F#. Uno seems to doing some great things though. The F# SQL type provider, however, is great. For those who don't know, this generates design- and compile-time types based on your (live)…

> UI isn't a strength on .NET to begin with

Sorry but remark only reveals lack of knowledge of what Forms, WPF and UWP are capable of, their related tooling and component libraries from the likes of Telerik, DevExpress, ComponentOne, among others.

Practically most modern Windows applications are mix of .NET and C++ libraries accessed via C++/CLI, P/Invoke or COM/UWP.

Plain old Win32 is left for legacy, games and a couple of unicorns like Adobe's Photoshop.

Application architecture design are the tools available in Visual Studio Enterprise for end-to-end application development, and modeling mapping into code modules, also known as Application Lifecyle Management.

Re: Aardvark – Real-time graphics and visualization in F#

#19

Post by avinium »

pjmlp wrote: post #18
avinium wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In all fairness, I haven't touched Visual Studio (for either F# or C# dev) in at least 18 months, so you're probably right. That being said, UI isn't a strength on .NET to begin with, so I think it's unfair to point that criticism at F#. Uno seems to doing some great things though. The F# SQL type provider, however, is great. For those who don't know, this generates design- and compile-time types based on your (live)…

> UI isn't a strength on .NET to begin with Sorry but remark only reveals lack of knowledge of what Forms, WPF and UWP are capable of, their related tooling and component libraries from the likes of Telerik, DevExpress, ComponentOne, among others. Practically most modern Windows applications are mix of .NET and C++ libraries accessed via C++/CLI, P/Invoke or COM/UWP. Plain old Win32 is left for legacy, games and a co…

> Sorry but remark only reveals lack of knowledge of what Forms, WPF and UWP are capable of, their related tooling and component libraries from the likes of Telerik, DevExpress, ComponentOne, among others.

I'm fully aware of WinForms, WPF, UWP, having built applications with all of them at one stage or another.

As far as UI frameworks go, they're serviceable - but no way am I recommending .NET just because of them (well, maybe WinForms if someone's writing that type of application).

Personal opinion, of course.

Post reply on HN