141–150 of 313 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find F# nowhere near as good as OCaml and think this comparison is ugly, but if I was forced to use a .NET platform I would almost certainly use F#
> nowhere near as good as OCaml I'd really like to hear more about this. From what I've used of F# and OCaml, both languages are around 95% the same.
> why isn’t OCaml more popular I've used OCaml a bit and found various issues with it: * Terrible Windows support. With OCaml 5 it's upgraded to "pretty bad". * The syntax is hard to parse for humans. Often it turns into a word soup, without any helpful punctuation to tell you what things are. It's like reading a book with no paragraphs, capitalisation or punctuation. * The syntax isn't recoverable. Sometimes you can…
I would love to spend more time but even though Microsoft gives it plenty of support (nowhere near as much as C#), the community is just too small (and seems to have gotten smaller).
Looking at https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/ numbers fall off pretty quickly from the top 5-7.
Guessing this is the same for OCaml, even if the language as such is nice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They've spoken about this before and might not have picked OCaml if they had to make the decision again today. I think at the time it made the most sense.They can also make it work in any language as they claim to only recruit the best and brightest in the world (this may be the truth). My opinion is they could have chosen many languages and had similar results while balancing different trade-offs. Regarding attracti…
> I could be an OCaml expert and have no chance of making it through an interview without equal talent in high performance fintech and relevant mathematics. Unless their hiring process has changed in the past few years, if you're a dev they're not hiring you for your financial skills, just general problem solving and software development ability. It is (was?) the usual Google-style algorithms/data structures rigamaro…
To this day, whenever I see Machine Learning abbreviated, my heart skips a beat, then I become crestfallen as I realize I'm not about to read something about Meta Language.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> nowhere near as good as OCaml I'd really like to hear more about this. From what I've used of F# and OCaml, both languages are around 95% the same.
If you are interested, I think I adress this here https://xvw.lol/en/articles/why-ocaml.html#ocaml-and-f
> Fewer abstractions, and an easy to understand runtime
> Strong static guarantees
> Functional programming constructs. Especially pattern matching and sum types.
> Good performance
> Good documentation
I feel this is also Elm!
OCaml has been one of those "almost there" languages since at least 2002. Most of the worthwhile ideas in OCaml will be absorbed into more popular languages by the time existing friction is sorted out. :/
Perhaps OCaml is the Velvet Underground of languages. Only a few thousand people learned OCaml but every one made a programming language[1] [1]: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2016/03/01/velvet/
> why isn’t OCaml more popular I've used OCaml a bit and found various issues with it: * Terrible Windows support. With OCaml 5 it's upgraded to "pretty bad". * The syntax is hard to parse for humans. Often it turns into a word soup, without any helpful punctuation to tell you what things are. It's like reading a book with no paragraphs, capitalisation or punctuation. * The syntax isn't recoverable. Sometimes you can…
This made me chuckle. I've had that thought before, shouldn't the default be a vector on modern devices? Of course other collection types are available.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's functional (recursion vs imperative loops) most people/organizations will not use it. At this point that is just the reality.
Having loops is not the defining feature that separates functional from imperative. Where did this idea come from? I'm suddenly seeing it in a lot of places.