3 ms·

>Would've been less work for them to write nice functional wrappers around existing .NET libraries. What? Why would they do it? Unix is a standard in the field

>Would've been less work for them to write nice functional wrappers around existing .NET libraries. What? Why would they do it? Unix is a standard in the field of scientific computations, so wrapping blas and lapack totally makes sense. Besides, OCaml already had good blas, lapack bindings.

profquail 7y ago
It's been feasible to run F# on Unix for years, first via Mono, and more recently with .NET Core.
BeetleB 7y ago
F# works just fine in Linux. Better than OCaml in Windows. It is the reason I decided to pick F# over OCaml.
- ernst_klim 7y ago
  >Better than OCaml in Windows. OCaml works great in windows and have good .Net bindings. LexiFi earns money nearly solely from OCaml on windows. >F# works just fine in Linux. Does it have bindings for the majority of popular libs? For example are there Gstreamer and Gtk F# bindings? Do they work on both .Net Core and Mono?
  - BeetleB 7y ago
    >OCaml works great in windows and have good .Net bindings. Perhaps I should clarify. While the language itself might work, the ecosystem didn't seem great. The last time I checked (less than a year ago), opam was mostly broken on Windows. opam is the officially recommended package manager. I didn't want to invest in a system where the official support was virtually nonexistent. Looking at it now, there does seem to be a port of opam for Windows, and the first commit in that repo was less than a year ago, so quite possibly after I last checked. If it works, I may just switch to it (although in my opinion any software requiring cygwin still means poor Windows support...). >Does it have bindings for the majority of popular libs? For example are there Gstreamer and Gtk F# bindings? Do they work on both .Net Core and Mono? There is GTK#[0], which claims support for both. There is Gst#[1], although they claim it is in early stage development. [0] https://www.mono-project.com/docs/gui/gtksharp/ https://www.mono-project.com/docs/gui/gtksharp/ [1] https://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/htdocs/bindings/dotnet.html https://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/htdocs/bindings/dotnet.htm...
    - ernst_klim 7y ago
      >The last time I checked (less than a year ago), opam was mostly broken on Windows opam had windows version based on cygwin for a long time [1]. > any software requiring cygwin still means poor Windows support And software requiring .Net has good linux support? Since when requiring an additional runtime means poor support? >While the language itself might work, the ecosystem didn't seem great. Sure, just like .Net ecosystem, which is totally absent on linux. No wpf, media foundation. And bindings to local facilities, like gstreamer, are lacking. Yet the only real metric of the maturity of the support is the fact that people use it in production. And people heavily use OCaml on windows in production. [1] https://fdopen.github.io/opam-repository-mingw/ https://fdopen.github.io/opam-repository-mingw/

profquail 7y ago

It's been feasible to run F# on Unix for years, first via Mono, and more recently with .NET Core.

BeetleB 7y ago

F# works just fine in Linux. Better than OCaml in Windows. It is the reason I decided to pick F# over OCaml.

ernst_klim 7y ago
>Better than OCaml in Windows. OCaml works great in windows and have good .Net bindings. LexiFi earns money nearly solely from OCaml on windows. >F# works just fine in Linux. Does it have bindings for the majority of popular libs? For example are there Gstreamer and Gtk F# bindings? Do they work on both .Net Core and Mono?
- BeetleB 7y ago
  >OCaml works great in windows and have good .Net bindings. Perhaps I should clarify. While the language itself might work, the ecosystem didn't seem great. The last time I checked (less than a year ago), opam was mostly broken on Windows. opam is the officially recommended package manager. I didn't want to invest in a system where the official support was virtually nonexistent. Looking at it now, there does seem to be a port of opam for Windows, and the first commit in that repo was less than a year ago, so quite possibly after I last checked. If it works, I may just switch to it (although in my opinion any software requiring cygwin still means poor Windows support...). >Does it have bindings for the majority of popular libs? For example are there Gstreamer and Gtk F# bindings? Do they work on both .Net Core and Mono? There is GTK#[0], which claims support for both. There is Gst#[1], although they claim it is in early stage development. [0] https://www.mono-project.com/docs/gui/gtksharp/ https://www.mono-project.com/docs/gui/gtksharp/ [1] https://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/htdocs/bindings/dotnet.html https://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/htdocs/bindings/dotnet.htm...
  - ernst_klim 7y ago
    >The last time I checked (less than a year ago), opam was mostly broken on Windows opam had windows version based on cygwin for a long time [1]. > any software requiring cygwin still means poor Windows support And software requiring .Net has good linux support? Since when requiring an additional runtime means poor support? >While the language itself might work, the ecosystem didn't seem great. Sure, just like .Net ecosystem, which is totally absent on linux. No wpf, media foundation. And bindings to local facilities, like gstreamer, are lacking. Yet the only real metric of the maturity of the support is the fact that people use it in production. And people heavily use OCaml on windows in production. [1] https://fdopen.github.io/opam-repository-mingw/ https://fdopen.github.io/opam-repository-mingw/