4 ms·
You sound that you will like Haskell. It's type system can be really paranoid (it lets you express many invariants through it), yet remain very flexible. And
by loup-vaillant 16y ago
You sound that you will like Haskell. It's type system can be really paranoid (it lets you express many invariants through it), yet remain very flexible. And If you can't fathom the segregation of (side) effects, there's still Ocaml.
- ldsa 16y agoOCaml is a dying, soon obsolete, language. Better use F# which has way better libraries and tools.
- zaphar 16y agoAs I understand it OCaml is in heavy use at a number of shops in the financial industry. I wouldn't say it was dying just yet. On the other hand F# is a new and as compared to OCaml untried and untested language.
- ldsa 16y agoNumber of financial companies using F# is about the same as for OCaml (but numbers are not evolving in the same manner). F# uses .NET which is way more tested than OCaml runtime. F# uses .NET libraries which are way more tested than OCaml libraries. F# core language is still a bit less tested, but considerable work is being done. In contrast, there is only fulltime person working on OCaml. OCaml community is dying, while .NET community is huge.
- zaphar 16y ago.Net being tested is not the same as F# being tested. The idea that the OCaml community is dying is purely subjective. OCaml, having been around longer than F#, may just be going through a perceived lull. Either way generalizing that F# will replace OCaml as the goto language in the ML family from a perceived decline in the OCaml community is probably not the right call.
- eru 16y agoWe also use Ocaml here (Citrix), and people agree that Ocaml seems to be going nowhere. Some projects have started switching to Haskell.
- loup-vaillant 16y agoDon't overlook the fact that F# is build on top of a proprietary, potentially patent-ridden platform. For many people, including me, that's a non starter.