61–70 of 313 posts
I loved Ocaml but now I love TypeScript more. It's got about the same amount of type safety, the ergonomics are better to me, and the packaging and ecosystem tooling are leaps and bounds above anything else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost there, but in the meantime supporting a casual squillion dollars of trades at JS
Yeah, but when these things happen I ask myself, is Jane Street successful because of ocaml, or did they just happen to pick ocaml and then make it work? There might be some power in attracting all the people who happen to love ocaml, if there are enough of competent people to staff your company, but that's more a case of cornering a small niche than picking on technical merits
I've dabbled in F# (and aside from the rough setup with little coherent information at the time) had a pretty good time. Actor-based concurrency was easy to grok. The one gotcha was whenever those mutable Arrays entered the picture. I'd like to hear some practical reasons for preferring OCaml over F#. [Hoping I don't get a lot about MS & .NET which are valid concerns but not what I'm curious about.] I want to know mo…
> I'd like to hear some practical reasons for preferring OCaml over F# Bigger native ecosystem. C#/.net integration is a double edged sword: a lot of libraries, but the libraries are not written in canonical F#. A lot of language features F# misses, like effect handlers, modules, GADTs etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost there, but in the meantime supporting a casual squillion dollars of trades at JS
Yeah, but when these things happen I ask myself, is Jane Street successful because of ocaml, or did they just happen to pick ocaml and then make it work? There might be some power in attracting all the people who happen to love ocaml, if there are enough of competent people to staff your company, but that's more a case of cornering a small niche than picking on technical merits
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alleged? Come now. Beginners face the following problems: there's multiple standard libraries, many documents are barely more than type signatures, and data structures aren't printable by default. Experts also face the problem of a very tiny library ecosystem, and tooling that's often a decade behind more mainstream languages (proper gdb support when?). OCaml added multicore support recently, but now there is the who…
TBH I think it's rather a post-hoc rationalization of why the language is not popular. > there's multiple standard libraries Scala has a far more fragmented ecosystem with Cats, Scalaz, Zio and Akka. C++ and Java have a bunch of stdlib extensions like boost, Guava, Apache Commons etc. > many documents are barely more than type signatures Can be said of most of Java, Kotlin, Scala, Erlang etc etc. Just compiled javado…
Elixir is the closest thing to OCaml that has a chance at semi-mainstream usage IMO. It has basically all of the stuff about functional programming that makes it easier to reason about your code & get work done - immutability, pattern matching, actors, etc. But without monads or a complicated type system that would give it a higher barrier to entry. And of course it's built on top of the Erlang BEAM runtime, which ha…
Elixir is the closest thing to OCaml that has a chance at semi-mainstream usage IMO. It has basically all of the stuff about functional programming that makes it easier to reason about your code & get work done - immutability, pattern matching, actors, etc. But without monads or a complicated type system that would give it a higher barrier to entry. And of course it's built on top of the Erlang BEAM runtime, which ha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s odd that elixir doesn’t get more love. It ticks a lot of boxes that folks here get excited about, has a great ecosystem and tooling, BEAM is great, and it’s much more syntactically familiar than erlang to my eye. I know of a couple companies aside from the perennial goto examples that built sizable saas products backed by it.
What does deployment look like? Can you get a static binary easily like with Go?
The current tool to wrap your bytecode with a VM so that it becomes standalone is Burrito[1], but there's some language support[2] (I think only for the arch that your CPU is currently running? contra Golang) and an older project called Distillery[3].
1: https://github.com/burrito-elixir/burrito
Elixir is the closest thing to OCaml that has a chance at semi-mainstream usage IMO. It has basically all of the stuff about functional programming that makes it easier to reason about your code & get work done - immutability, pattern matching, actors, etc. But without monads or a complicated type system that would give it a higher barrier to entry. And of course it's built on top of the Erlang BEAM runtime, which ha…
Gleam also. But i cant justify a non compiled language in many things i do.