10 ms·

This was also predated by the Opa "framework" which is indeed a compiler for the web platform, announced in 2009 and released a bit later. At the time, people

by hbbio 9y ago

This was also predated by the Opa "framework" which is indeed a compiler for the web platform, announced in 2009 and released a bit later. At the time, people didn't want to hear about a new language so we had to hide behind a framework. But one of the ideas was that there is no sense in bundling libraries at runtime instead of generating exactly the application code that should run. Cf. http://opalang.org http://opalang.org (disclaimer: I was the project creator)

cromwellian 9y ago
Yup, Opa is pretty nice. It just highlights the differences between "compilers" and "transpilers" which came up in another thread recently. There's a number of transpilers that are fairly simplistic transforms of source languages, or JS->JS translation (lowering ES7/6 to ES5, etc) which do limited whole world optimization, and mostly consist of peephole passes. Closure, Opa, GWT, Dart, and a few others (ScalaJS?) run fully optimizing compiler passes like a traditional old school compiler. For example, IIRC, Dart transforms (or used to) to Hydrogen IR/SSA internally, runs lots of optimizations, and then transforms back before JS output. This is not to bash transpilers, but I don't consider Webpack/Babel/Uglify in the same category.
sambe 9y ago
I was just thinking about Opa the other day - it looked nice but I never used it. People were worried about debugging through the layers of abstraction. Is it still "alive"? You write in the past tense...
- hbbio 9y ago
  It is not really alive as of now. But there is still space for a full stack language and Opa is relevant today. MLstate, the startup behind Opa, shifted to secure communication platforms (built with Opa) and was acquired last year but without Opa itself. Many things we did became hype later (implemented in OCaml, a functional language, JSX before React - I know Jordan played with Opa before building React) and we still have bits that are missing is today's stacks. The ideal next step would be to join a foundation so that development on the project could resume.
  - Drup 9y ago
    Tierless programming languages did not started nor ended with Opa. Eliom is very well alive and kicking (disclaimer: I'm finishing my PHD on the topic), as well as Hop, Split.js, Ur/Web, Links, Websharper, ... I was always very disappointed by the fact that the inner workings of Opa were never described in any way. I can't even really cite it in my PHD thesis, because the documentation for the early (and more interesting, imho) versions has completely disappeared.
    - nickpsecurity 9y ago
      The first I saw was Curl from MIT: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curl_(programming_language) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curl_(programming_language)
  - jules 9y ago
    What is present in Opa that is missing in other stacks?

by hbbio 9y ago

cromwellian 9y ago

Yup, Opa is pretty nice. It just highlights the differences between "compilers" and "transpilers" which came up in another thread recently. There's a number of transpilers that are fairly simplistic transforms of source languages, or JS->JS translation (lowering ES7/6 to ES5, etc) which do limited whole world optimization, and mostly consist of peephole passes. Closure, Opa, GWT, Dart, and a few others (ScalaJS?) run fully optimizing compiler passes like a traditional old school compiler. For example, IIRC, Dart transforms (or used to) to Hydrogen IR/SSA internally, runs lots of optimizations, and then transforms back before JS output. This is not to bash transpilers, but I don't consider Webpack/Babel/Uglify in the same category.

sambe 9y ago

I was just thinking about Opa the other day - it looked nice but I never used it. People were worried about debugging through the layers of abstraction. Is it still "alive"? You write in the past tense...

hbbio 9y ago
It is not really alive as of now. But there is still space for a full stack language and Opa is relevant today. MLstate, the startup behind Opa, shifted to secure communication platforms (built with Opa) and was acquired last year but without Opa itself. Many things we did became hype later (implemented in OCaml, a functional language, JSX before React - I know Jordan played with Opa before building React) and we still have bits that are missing is today's stacks. The ideal next step would be to join a foundation so that development on the project could resume.
- Drup 9y ago
  Tierless programming languages did not started nor ended with Opa. Eliom is very well alive and kicking (disclaimer: I'm finishing my PHD on the topic), as well as Hop, Split.js, Ur/Web, Links, Websharper, ... I was always very disappointed by the fact that the inner workings of Opa were never described in any way. I can't even really cite it in my PHD thesis, because the documentation for the early (and more interesting, imho) versions has completely disappeared.
  - nickpsecurity 9y ago
    The first I saw was Curl from MIT: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curl_(programming_language) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curl_(programming_language)
- jules 9y ago
  What is present in Opa that is missing in other stacks?