3 ms·

Productivity gains by well tested vast number of libraries and frameworks far far outweigh gains due to language features such as pattern matching. Sure you can

by sytelus 11y ago

Productivity gains by well tested vast number of libraries and frameworks far far outweigh gains due to language features such as pattern matching. Sure you can drop down to C from pretty much any language but most setups attempt to minimize that because maintaining hybrid language infrastructure (build/unit tests/upgrades/logging/auth etc) is typically expensive over long run. Also, may be calling libraries may be ok but using entire frameworks is much harder to use cross language.

rwmj 11y ago
Except that it's easy to call down to C from OCaml so you precisely do not have to maintain that sort of infrastructure. OCaml also has a large number of native libraries of course.
sklogic 11y ago
Imagine you have to write an optimising compiler for some exotic DSL, targeting a custom embedded platform. All the hipster "frameworks" and "vast number" of irrelevant shitty libraries won't help at all, while pattern matching alone will be extremely useful.
ldrndll 11y ago
> Productivity gains by well tested vast number of libraries and frameworks far far outweigh gains due to language features I see this argument all the time. I don't know if the type of software development I do is special (I doubt it, it's fairly standard business software), but the amount of time I spent on business logic dominates total development time. Past a certain fairly low threshold of core libraries (HTTP, JSON, CSV, database bindings, standard stuff like that), the amount of time libraries can save you is dwarfed by the cost of refactoring all that business logic. On the other hand, if the language is so niche as to lack the basics, you can find your entire development budget spent on building functionality other languages offer out the box. I don't think OCaml is that niche...

3 ms·

Productivity gains by well tested vast number of libraries and frameworks far far outweigh gains due to language features such as pattern matching. Sure you can

by sytelus 11y ago

rwmj 11y ago
Except that it's easy to call down to C from OCaml so you precisely do not have to maintain that sort of infrastructure. OCaml also has a large number of native libraries of course.
sklogic 11y ago
Imagine you have to write an optimising compiler for some exotic DSL, targeting a custom embedded platform. All the hipster "frameworks" and "vast number" of irrelevant shitty libraries won't help at all, while pattern matching alone will be extremely useful.
ldrndll 11y ago
> Productivity gains by well tested vast number of libraries and frameworks far far outweigh gains due to language features I see this argument all the time. I don't know if the type of software development I do is special (I doubt it, it's fairly standard business software), but the amount of time I spent on business logic dominates total development time. Past a certain fairly low threshold of core libraries (HTTP, JSON, CSV, database bindings, standard stuff like that), the amount of time libraries can save you is dwarfed by the cost of refactoring all that business logic. On the other hand, if the language is so niche as to lack the basics, you can find your entire development budget spent on building functionality other languages offer out the box. I don't think OCaml is that niche...