OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
github.com
OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
1–10 of 103 posts
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#2I think most programming languages and associated tools will start supporting ARM64 as a first class citizen. The current lack of support isn't due to apathy, just constraints around ARM64 not being popular for desktop development. For example, it's difficult to support a platform that isn't well supported by your CI/CD provider.
Linus Torvalds previously said that ARM on the server would never be a thing since developers didn't run ARM on their personal machines. Since this assumption is no longer true, the ecosystem of tools will now support ARM better and we'll see ARM on the server become a major thing in a few year's time.
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#3By reading the stream of comments on the PR, and from my own experience, I feel that it is extremely cumbersome to do code reviews on Github. Atlassian's Fisheye/Crucible looks like a better solution. Does anyone think otherwise? I think Github has a large room of improvement in this regard; a PR is not the same as an issue.
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#4I think most programming languages and associated tools will start supporting ARM64 as a first class citizen. The current lack of support isn't due to apathy, just constraints around ARM64 not being popular for desktop development. For example, it's difficult to support a platform that isn't well supported by your CI/CD provider. Linus Torvalds previously said that ARM on the server would never be a thing since devel…
I don't think that was the case for a long time on the tooling side, OCaml has a great support for ARM64 for a long time now, but Linux ARM64. But well most developers aren't actually using Linux.
But a thing that is going to change is supporting iOS, one of the reasons that this PR was approved(and it adds support to iOS) it's mostly because there is a Mac ARM64
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#5I think most programming languages and associated tools will start supporting ARM64 as a first class citizen. The current lack of support isn't due to apathy, just constraints around ARM64 not being popular for desktop development. For example, it's difficult to support a platform that isn't well supported by your CI/CD provider. Linus Torvalds previously said that ARM on the server would never be a thing since devel…
> The current lack of support
I'm not sure that's even true from a tooling perspective. It's true that desktop applications often don't support ARM64, but toolchains usually do because both Android and iOS are primarily ARM64 and are hugely popular platforms.
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#6By reading the stream of comments on the PR, and from my own experience, I feel that it is extremely cumbersome to do code reviews on Github. Atlassian's Fisheye/Crucible looks like a better solution. Does anyone think otherwise? I think Github has a large room of improvement in this regard; a PR is not the same as an issue.
I don't feel like GH is really meant to be a code review platform. It does PRs, but I assume that review should be done offline (like in other tools, like Crucible).
We have used GH as a review platform for an open-source project, but they tend to be relatively minor PRs. If they got hairier, we'd probably find something else.
Personally, I really don't like having a gazillion different tools. If we can use one tool for several purposes, then that's what I prefer. If the tool becomes too cumbersome, then I'll work with something more specialized.
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#7By reading the stream of comments on the PR, and from my own experience, I feel that it is extremely cumbersome to do code reviews on Github. Atlassian's Fisheye/Crucible looks like a better solution. Does anyone think otherwise? I think Github has a large room of improvement in this regard; a PR is not the same as an issue.
I've been using GitHub for code review (both open-source and commercial projects) for about 5 years. It's improved a little bit, but for PRs with >100 files changed it's obviously lacking good UX.
For me, the biggest improvement would be the tree-view you get in Fisheye/Crucible. It's so hard to get a grasp on large refactoring PRs on GitHub.
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#8By reading the stream of comments on the PR, and from my own experience, I feel that it is extremely cumbersome to do code reviews on Github. Atlassian's Fisheye/Crucible looks like a better solution. Does anyone think otherwise? I think Github has a large room of improvement in this regard; a PR is not the same as an issue.
I don't feel like GH is really meant to be a code review platform. It does PRs, but I assume that review should be done offline (like in other tools, like Crucible). We have used GH as a review platform for an open-source project, but they tend to be relatively minor PRs. If they got hairier, we'd probably find something else. Personally, I really don't like having a gazillion different tools. If we can use one tool…
Is there a good self-hosted open source platform for this? I’m new to all this, even though I’ve been computing since I was in grade school. Coding is a new discipline for me, and it’s hard to know the territory without a guide. I’ve seen you around and would trust a recommendation from you.
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#9By reading the stream of comments on the PR, and from my own experience, I feel that it is extremely cumbersome to do code reviews on Github. Atlassian's Fisheye/Crucible looks like a better solution. Does anyone think otherwise? I think Github has a large room of improvement in this regard; a PR is not the same as an issue.
On GH I can see the files that are changed and make/read comments that are inline on the files as well. This has been sufficient for my needs. What is it that Fisheye/Crucible brings to the table that you think would be desirable on GH?
Re: OCaml: Add support to iOS/Mac ARM64
#10By reading the stream of comments on the PR, and from my own experience, I feel that it is extremely cumbersome to do code reviews on Github. Atlassian's Fisheye/Crucible looks like a better solution. Does anyone think otherwise? I think Github has a large room of improvement in this regard; a PR is not the same as an issue.
I've been using GitHub for code review (both open-source and commercial projects) for about 5 years. It's improved a little bit, but for PRs with >100 files changed it's obviously lacking good UX. For me, the biggest improvement would be the tree-view you get in Fisheye/Crucible. It's so hard to get a grasp on large refactoring PRs on GitHub.
I wonder how one does manage a PR with >100 files changed. I realize these are sometimes unavoidable, but shouldn't we strive for smaller PRs? No tool will help you with exploding complexity...