Are we getting any closer of developing .NET / WPF apps on Mac? (Wishful thinking, shameless cry)
Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
21–30 of 104 posts
Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#22Are we getting any closer of developing .NET / WPF apps on Mac? (Wishful thinking, shameless cry)
Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#23Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#24Java is Oracle stack, C# is MS stack, objective-C is Apple stack. Is there an opportunity for an open language with similar VM ease-of-use/performance tradeoffs - or is hardware now fast enough for the ease/speed of dynamic languages to fill that gap (Python, Ruby, Javascript, ...)?
Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#25But I don't quite see how F# replaces R or Matlab, even with library support. Performance alone seems dubious value proposition, since packages like Jacket for Matlab make most computations extremely fast.
Anybody have experience where demand for strongly typed language is really needed for data analysis tasks?
Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#26It's interesting how the F# team is pushing F# to be the language for data-rich programming. Their Type Provider concept looks promising, but some of their demos still are comically difficult coming from a R/Matlab/Python style of data-rich programming. Of course coming from C#/Java it all looks amazing. But I don't quite see how F# replaces R or Matlab, even with library support. Performance alone seems dubious valu…
Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#27"After some discussion, we’ve decided to do this via a “code drop” model..." They lost me here.
They can't afford to do otherwise. Accepting community contributions will increase the MS surface area for copyright/patent infringements. The F# team is mostly a research outfit - they aren't going to vet patches.
Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can't afford to do otherwise. Accepting community contributions will increase the MS surface area for copyright/patent infringements. The F# team is mostly a research outfit - they aren't going to vet patches.
What is the main value then?
As it happens right now with IronPython / IronRuby.
I.e. it is just a promise that even if F# isn't receiving the same support as C# is, you have a safety net (kind of).
Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#29"After some discussion, we’ve decided to do this via a “code drop” model..." They lost me here.
They can't afford to do otherwise. Accepting community contributions will increase the MS surface area for copyright/patent infringements. The F# team is mostly a research outfit - they aren't going to vet patches.
If that increased the "surface area for copyright/patent infringements" were so great, or were such a dramatic burden, then the above would not be true. But it is true.
Let's look at Cassandra as an absolute prime example of what I'm talking about. The original version of Cassandra was a code drop by Facebook. It made some news in tech blogs, and then mostly everyone forgot about it. A few months later, another version was dropped, but this time nobody really noticed.
Then Jonathan Ellis found the codebase, imported it into GitHub, and started doing development on it in the open, and accepting patches. Sure enough, more people started to take notice and watch as development happened, and started to contribute back. A community started forming. Facebook then donated the project to the Apache Software Foundation, where it's continued to be developed in the open and thrive. Now it's supported by many companies; in fact new companies have sprung up specifically on the premise of providing support for it.
Empirically speaking, the software has had much more development since it switched to being developed in the open. Subjectively speaking, it's simply a vastly improved piece of software from when it was handled as a "code drop", it's boosted Facebook's credibility in the eyes of developers for having started the project, and it's gained much more popularity.
So, going back to F#, what are the goals that Microsoft is trying to further with its platform? I'll posit three (of which there are certainly more): to increase the reach of the .NET platform, to boost Microsoft mindshare, and to increase developer productivity.
Each one of those goals are served better by moving to an open development model, for fairly obvious reasons.
I didn't mean for this response to become so long, but it just seems to me that this is such an obvious and unfortunate blunder that it renders the whole open sourcing of the language nearly worthless.
Re: Microsoft releases F# under Apache 2.0 license
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can't afford to do otherwise. Accepting community contributions will increase the MS surface area for copyright/patent infringements. The F# team is mostly a research outfit - they aren't going to vet patches.
What is the main value then?