3 ms·
It's true that ocaml has different contribution entry profile. The only "issue" here is that flow being a js tool, naturally would attract more js contributions
by mirekrusin 7y ago
It's true that ocaml has different contribution entry profile. The only "issue" here is that flow being a js tool, naturally would attract more js contributions, but that's it. You can't say ocaml itself is not fit for purpose because this kind of tool is pefect use case for ocaml. It would be interesting to see flow rewrite in flow itself thought.
- ng12 7y agoIt being written in OCaml is why the tooling is poor. TypeScript integrates perfectly with most build tooling (e.g. Webpack) because it's just JavaScript like every other tool. To run Flow everything has to be shelled out to an external bin which adds a lot of flakiness and manual configuration if you want to integrate it with your build config. I understand OCaml is great for writing meta languages (ha) but it's bad for the end user.
- mirekrusin 7y agoMaybe, but personally I don't use any tooling at all, just raw js with types in comments and npm test as `eslint . && flow check && jest`.