4 ms·
Ok, yeah, I guess that's personal preference then. I have only superficial experience with traditional MLs and am currently experimenting with ReasonML, and it
by elcapitan 9y ago
Ok, yeah, I guess that's personal preference then. I have only superficial experience with traditional MLs and am currently experimenting with ReasonML, and it just feels more intuitive and productive right from the start, and context switching is easier.
With regard to operator overloading, that's the number one issue I had anytime I looked for example at haskell, it's just incredibly hard to figure out what some <=$=> operator or whatever means, and also very hard to google, so for newcomers it's really bad language UI.
- hajile 9y agoOperator overloading has pros and cons. In truth, I'm inclined to agree with you that operator overload should be limited in userland, but I'm a bit incredulous at the choice with primitive data types. There are 12 or so common primitive numeric types baked into hardware. If Ocaml ever expanded to include these all, the effect without overloading would be horrendous.
- elcapitan 9y agoOk yes, agreed, the separate operators for different numeric types are not exactly very user-friendly either. In the de-facto use case of Reason they shouldn't be such a big deal though (building webapps).