3 ms·
> if I could write code in go + rust generics + macros and not have to deal with the lifetime borrow checking crap, I would be so happy :-) You might like OCam
by PeCaN 10y ago
> if I could write code in go + rust generics + macros and not have to deal with the lifetime borrow checking crap, I would be so happy :-)
You might like OCaml. It's easy to write like Go but with a much more useful type system. Downside: concurrency is not as pleasant as in Go… at all. Then again, I see a lot of things written in Go that aren't particularly concurrent and just happen to use Go because the author wanted a moderately high-level compiled language with automatic memory management. OCaml is excellent for those.
- weberc2 10y agoAlso, Reason (a syntax on top of OCaml) makes OCaml look pleasant.
- PeCaN 10y agoOCaml already looks nice <_< (…Once you've used it for a bit. I admit it looks kinda weird at first.) I recall Reason didn't yet support some important part of OCaml syntax, but I don't remember what that was. Though I don't dispute that Reason is a good thing—Erlang saw a lot of growth from Elixir, hopefully Reason will get people into OCaml.
- gnuvince 10y ago> OCaml already looks nice <_< I agree; I find Reason to be a completely pointless project except if Facebook hopes to fracture the OCaml community.
- LeonidasXIV 10y agoFortunately Reason compiles to ordinary OCaml compiled modules, so everything they write can seamlessly interop with regular OCaml in both ways. But yeah, I also don't think the Reason syntax is that massive of an improvement: https://xivilization.net/~marek/blog/2016/05/19/reason-lets-see-what-happens/ https://xivilization.net/~marek/blog/2016/05/19/reason-lets-...
- douche 10y agoIn the same family, but with fairly nice concurrency (as far as I've gone with it) is F#. Even works on Linux, through mono now, and hopefully soon with .net core.