101–110 of 294 posts
This looks very interesting. I've always had OCaml in mind but never actually got around to using it in a project. Facebook could have done a better job describing what exactly this is, but they do provide a good overview at the end of the page (strangely!) [1]. In summary, Reason [2] is a new language (correction: interface to OCaml) that shares a part of the OCaml compiler toolchain and runtime. I don't know of any…
This looks very interesting. I've always had OCaml in mind but never actually got around to using it in a project. Facebook could have done a better job describing what exactly this is, but they do provide a good overview at the end of the page (strangely!) [1]. In summary, Reason [2] is a new language (correction: interface to OCaml) that shares a part of the OCaml compiler toolchain and runtime. I don't know of any…
Thanks for the thoughts. I would definitely not call Reason a new language, but rather a new interface to an existing language that is already great. Not all languages make it easy to provide such an interface, but OCaml did, and the timing made sense.
Can we please keep using parens for function invocation? Leaving them out hurts readability.
The difference between curried langs like OCaml and Haskell and languages like Ruby and Elixir are that the leaving out of parens actually means something, ie. all functions take one argument. If you wanted parens whilst maintaining the same semantics, you would end up having to do write: `add(2)(3)`
The slowness in Firefox appears to be solely due to this: @media (min-width: 1180px) { body:not(.no-literate) .content-root { background-color: #fdfcfc; -webkit-box-shadow: inset 780px 0 #fff, inset 781px 0 #e7e7e7, inset 790px 0 3px -10px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); box-shadow: inset 780px 0 #fff, inset 781px 0 #e7e7e7, inset 790px 0 3px -10px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); } } Removing it in the Firefox style editor restores normal perfo…
Do it provide a usable standard lib? If so, I may try to use it in side project.
Interesting but since they are designing a revised syntax, I wish they had got rid of Ocaml's semi colon. These stand out in 2016.
See the FAQ, as this is a fairly anticipated question. There's some benefits to having some token to separate let bindings and statements, so that the grammar is unambiguous, and it doesn't matter too much which token is used (monkey emoji anyone?) However, I think it may be possible to eliminate delimiters altogether eventually. Because we have the `refmt` program which can convert and beautify between two arbitrary…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the question was, what's the relationship between Reason and JavaScript?
Looks like their plan is to reuse the ocaml compiler backends that output javascript; but it doesn't sound like they're doing anything explicit to promote Reason -> Javascript compilation.
Can we please keep using parens for function invocation? Leaving them out hurts readability.
Please take a look at the FAQ which describes the best way to move forward with evolving the syntax. It helps to know your personal technical background and where you're coming from, as well. I do like your idea, but you can currently use parens - it's just that they aren't required by the parser when the argument is clearly one item (like an integer constant etc). Then at that point, it's just a matter of configurin…
Don't let my complains about syntax deter you, this looks like a very exciting project!