A better build system for OCaml

Post by eru » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 10:10 AM UTC

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #49

codr7 wrote: post #6

I spent several years in Haskell land a while back, my first functional experience after Lisp. Ocaml never clicked for me, I have a rare form of semicolon allergy and Haskell just looked a lot nicer to me. But then I recently tried Reason and enjoyed it A LOT, so everything Ocaml is suddenly interesting.

It's funny because the thing that always turned me off from Haskell was that it feels like a stream of whitespace and identifies without good visual cues as to structure. I'm sure once you get the zen of it, it's fine. Like Lisp, I guess, you learn to think in its structure. But looking at a screenful of Haskell to me is intimidating. Of the bunch I found SML/NJ to be the most readable.

Post by vacheron » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 10:21 AM UTC

smabie wrote: post #88

globular-toast wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but could you live with the fact that you're providing absolutely no value to the world? It always makes me sad when the greatest minds get gobbled up by these companies because they're creaming off the top of an enormously complex system they created.

People outside the industry just use that as cope because they making way less money. "How do you live with yourself making high 6 fig / 7 figs a yr?" Quite easily in fact.

Post by leg100 » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 10:27 AM UTC

eru wrote: post #116

n4r9 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mother capitalism deems that our brightest young minds best serve humanity in two tasks. Keeping the public passively scrolling, and moving money at speed to make wealthy people more wealthy.

Actually, not. These market makers are often prop shops. That means they use their own fund (prop = proprietary) to do the trading. They can do that because they don't need much capital to run. So the story here is that over the last twenty years they stole the lunch from the traditional market makers like eg banks. Of course, they got rich in the process. But they started from relatively modest means, compared to th…

Post by jeofken » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 10:33 AM UTC

jlarocco wrote: post #27

kyawzazaw wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> HM-typed functional programming Mercury also uses Haskell for their backend https://mercury.com/

Too bad they didn't use their namesake: https://mercurylang.org/ Would honestly be a lot more interesting than Haskell.

Post by homebrewer » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 11:02 AM UTC

ahartmetz wrote: post #73

queuebert wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried meson? I used it once many years ago, and it seemed slightly better.

Meson's approach to simplicity is if you need anything nontrivial, you simply add it to Meson itself. In CMake, you can script it in more cases.