4 ms·
For what it's worth it, I absolutely love Kraftwerk but, having coded in Scheme for about a decade, I very much dislike Scheme. I'd take Haskell, C++, or Java o
by afc 7y ago
For what it's worth it, I absolutely love Kraftwerk but, having coded in Scheme for about a decade, I very much dislike Scheme. I'd take Haskell, C++, or Java over Scheme without hesitation. I feel that my life is too short to code in languages without static type checks.
- bitwize 7y agoYes, a static type system at least strong enough to support parametric polymorphism is an unmitigated win. JavaScript sucks in the same way Scheme does in this regard; but thankfully, there's TypeScript.
- alharith 7y agoTry ReasonML
- throwaway17_17 7y agoI would say that if your only problem with Scheme is the lack of static typing, as opposed to the litany of other complaints that are popular, then Typed Racket is a serviceable language. I would say it’s type system is at least equal what you get in C++ or Java. It is not as expressive as Haskell (but really what is that doesn’t go full Idris/Agda/ATS), but there are some #langs making headway to that space.