Live data from Hacker News

Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

fable.io

71–80 of 131 posts

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#71

I see some F# praising in here. any good learning resources one can recommend to me (Ik I can "google it" or whatever. I mean something you had experience with and would recommend)

http://fsharpforfunandprofit.com The one true way (his book is also very good)

Bought the book as well and would recommend it. Also have a look at Scott's talks (links are on the website or search his name in youtube)

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't tried Fable 3 yet, but I can speak to Fable 2 (F#) vs ReScript/ReasonML (OCaml). F# was heavily inspired by OCaml, it was originally intended as "What would OCaml look like running on .NET?" so the languages themselves share a lot of similarities. ReasonML pros: - ReasonML compilation times were much faster than Fable 2, but Fable compile times weren't bad. OCaml is ridiculously fast. - OCaml has an interes…

I think you are missing the biggest advantage of F#: computation expressions. Computation expressions are like do-notation and list comprehensions in one feature. Now that I have tried them, I don't want to go back to a language without!

Oh yes! These are amazing. Took me a while to understand what they do, but now the simplest way I think of it is that they're powerful enough to let you build your own async/await (though you don't need to - async await computation expressions are already included)

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#73
Can anyone with experience with Fable -

- compare their experience with ReasonML since they both have the same OcaML pedigree

- offer any perspectives on efficiencies of various constructs? For example, do things like seq add additional complexity or are about as efficient as for loops?

- discuss the output size .. by virtue of using .net libraries versus javascript builtins?

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#74
post #48

We're an F#-first company and I'd like to share our experience here. All our new code is in F#, we started off from a C# codebase, so that made the transition somewhat manageable, as new F# code can be directly called from C#, and vice versa (still took over 2 years). All new frontend apps are also being written in F# (using Fable), as of 6 months back, migrating away from TypeScript, this forces everyone into a "des…

I’m curious how F# encourages the “design your model first, and well” more than typescript does.

Is it the functional paradigm, your framework, some of both?

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#75

I see some F# praising in here. any good learning resources one can recommend to me (Ik I can "google it" or whatever. I mean something you had experience with and would recommend)

Here is a brand new F# course on Udemy. Highly recommended! https://www.udemy.com/course/fsharp-from-the-ground-up/

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#76

This looks like a great update: prettier code output plus roughly double the compilation speed. Compilation speed is one of the things that put me off Fable when I kicked the tires a while ago. That and tooling was a mess. I really like F# as a language, but it's hard to give up the high quality tooling of VS Code + TypeScript + almost any NPM package w/ proper types.

Was trying to use F# at work for a backend service and got shut down.

Ended up using Typescript instead and it doesn't feel as clean.

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't tried Fable 3 yet, but I can speak to Fable 2 (F#) vs ReScript/ReasonML (OCaml). F# was heavily inspired by OCaml, it was originally intended as "What would OCaml look like running on .NET?" so the languages themselves share a lot of similarities. ReasonML pros: - ReasonML compilation times were much faster than Fable 2, but Fable compile times weren't bad. OCaml is ridiculously fast. - OCaml has an interes…

I think you are missing the biggest advantage of F#: computation expressions. Computation expressions are like do-notation and list comprehensions in one feature. Now that I have tried them, I don't want to go back to a language without!

Interesting. But is it true that that is nothing like that in other languages?

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#79
post #48

We're an F#-first company and I'd like to share our experience here. All our new code is in F#, we started off from a C# codebase, so that made the transition somewhat manageable, as new F# code can be directly called from C#, and vice versa (still took over 2 years). All new frontend apps are also being written in F# (using Fable), as of 6 months back, migrating away from TypeScript, this forces everyone into a "des…

That's a good pitch!

Re: Fable 3: F# to JavaScript compiler

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't tried Fable 3 yet, but I can speak to Fable 2 (F#) vs ReScript/ReasonML (OCaml). F# was heavily inspired by OCaml, it was originally intended as "What would OCaml look like running on .NET?" so the languages themselves share a lot of similarities. ReasonML pros: - ReasonML compilation times were much faster than Fable 2, but Fable compile times weren't bad. OCaml is ridiculously fast. - OCaml has an interes…

I think you are missing the biggest advantage of F#: computation expressions. Computation expressions are like do-notation and list comprehensions in one feature. Now that I have tried them, I don't want to go back to a language without!

This is just monadic bind, every functional language has this
Post reply on HN