It's being deprecated everywhere to be honest.
Ballerina Programing Language
11–20 of 56 posts
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#12> Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept. I can't believe we haven't all learnt the lesson of how much of a bad idea this principle is. Has this guy not heard of HTML and quirks mode?
Only because nobody ever persuaded document authors to be conservative (strictly schema conforming) in what they send.
And that is because everyone was liberal in what they accepted, so there was no need to.
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#13> Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept. I can't believe we haven't all learnt the lesson of how much of a bad idea this principle is. Has this guy not heard of HTML and quirks mode?
It's a great principle when you can ship one version every 18 months or so. A better maxim for today: "be strict in what you accept, and send garbage now-and-then to keep the others on their toes".
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#14This is the best landing page/documentation I've seen in a while. The examples with detailed comments are really outstanding.
I sincerely disagree. The introduction requires way too much effort. It is difficult to read, it is not structured well enough, it is too wordy (but missing vital "to the point" examples), and with bad fonts and color choices.
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#15I like the idea but I'm not impressed by the language. Syntactically there is a lot of noise (e.g. semicolons, function types are incredibly verbose). It seems to be missing generic types, pattern matching doesn't seem to express structural recursion, if is not an expression, etc. etc.
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#16“Network in the language” has to be a deliberate reference / kudos to Sun’s famous slogan “the network is the computer”.
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#17I like the idea but I'm not impressed by the language. Syntactically there is a lot of noise (e.g. semicolons, function types are incredibly verbose). It seems to be missing generic types, pattern matching doesn't seem to express structural recursion, if is not an expression, etc. etc.
The language has a lot of syntactic compromises, because it has a design goal of being familiar to users of C-family languages like C, JavaScript, Java, C#, etc.
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#18I have followed this language passively for ~1.5 years. I think it's revolutionary, and the big barrier for my adoption is the fact that I do not currently write services for the JVM. But the ability to define services as HTTP/Ingress endpoints, Docker containers, and Kubernetes/Openshift resources natively as part of the language is incredible. Add that to the fact that they have native support for things like tabul…
I looked through examples and I don't see what's so revolutionary about it. This is specialized language suited for more or less one task that has nothing specialized for that task which cannot be rolled in Clojure in a day or two. Challenge me, give one example that can't be done as easily with Clojure.
I am curious as well; this still looks like too much plumbing to be revolutionary. It is too close to what we have been doing for years with mainstream languages and tools.
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#19I like the idea but I'm not impressed by the language. Syntactically there is a lot of noise (e.g. semicolons, function types are incredibly verbose). It seems to be missing generic types, pattern matching doesn't seem to express structural recursion, if is not an expression, etc. etc.
The language has a lot of syntactic compromises, because it has a design goal of being familiar to users of C-family languages like C, JavaScript, Java, C#, etc.
I don't really buy that argument. Even Java has simple lambdas now, for example.
Re: Ballerina Programing Language
#20I have followed this language passively for ~1.5 years. I think it's revolutionary, and the big barrier for my adoption is the fact that I do not currently write services for the JVM. But the ability to define services as HTTP/Ingress endpoints, Docker containers, and Kubernetes/Openshift resources natively as part of the language is incredible. Add that to the fact that they have native support for things like tabul…
I looked through examples and I don't see what's so revolutionary about it. This is specialized language suited for more or less one task that has nothing specialized for that task which cannot be rolled in Clojure in a day or two. Challenge me, give one example that can't be done as easily with Clojure.
Generally, the big benefit of not using Clojure is to reduce the probability of having Clojure programmers on the project.