4 ms·

Coming at Crystal from a Go and PHP development background, here are my thoughts: - The syntax is lovely. No, really. - I hate waiting for it to compile, espe

Coming at Crystal from a Go and PHP development background, here are my thoughts: - The syntax is lovely. No, really. - I hate waiting for it to compile, especially compared to Go's compile time. - It's really young yet, and the ecosystem is just getting started.

ryan-allen 6y ago
The macros are really cool, too. https://github.com/luckyframework/lucky/blob/master/src/lucky/tags/base_tags.cr https://github.com/luckyframework/lucky/blob/master/src/luck...
tluyben2 6y ago
> - The syntax is lovely. No, really. Matter of taste; I find it horrible, just as I find Ruby syntax horrible. And I do not care about syntax too much generally (among my production langs are k and clojure) but I find this an eye sore; don’t know why but it is what it is. Edit: aaah downvotes for an opinion :) Anyway, background; I maintained a huge Rails codebase for years; it was pretty much the worst thing I ever did (in 30 years of production coding) and that was pretty much down because how much I don't like the syntax. That doesn't happen often.
- iomcr 6y ago
  Ruby syntax's alleged beauty is one one of its most popular features and you're in a thread about a language that intentionally copied that feature.
- bovermyer 6y ago
  For what it's worth, I thought your comment was reasonable given the discussion and upvoted it. You're allowed to hate Crystal's syntax. I'd be curious to hear why, though.
- mekster 6y ago
  I don't like rails either but I like ruby syntax. You're sure you don't like ruby and not rails? You got downvoted for not liking something "just because". (I didn't downvote.)
  - tluyben2 6y ago
    Is that not a matter of taste means? I even say I do not know why; I just break out in hives when I open a ruby file. When I open up a file to start programming, I have to have some feeling of ‘let’s do it’; I have that with most languages but with ruby I just think ‘crap this is ugly’. Not sure how to explain that; it is more like trying to explain why I prefer Klee over Rembrandt. I guess some people can but I cannot put that into words.
    - mekster 6y ago
      I share the same feeling when opening up rails project because of their own weird rules and files being all over the place. I don't feel that when writing a single ruby file and feel elegant.
      - tluyben2 6y ago
        I don't know... http://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Mutual_recursion#Ruby http://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Mutual_recursion#Ruby I find almost every other implementation better on the eyes; picolisp, pari/gp, nim and some others I would call elegant; the Ruby version looks like overly noisy and fairly ugly to me. Not so much (but still) the function defs, but p (Array.new(20) {|n| F(n) }) I find pretty nasty for some reason (again, not sure why). Randomly picked example.

ryan-allen 6y ago

The macros are really cool, too. https://github.com/luckyframework/lucky/blob/master/src/lucky/tags/base_tags.cr https://github.com/luckyframework/lucky/blob/master/src/luck...

tluyben2 6y ago

> - The syntax is lovely. No, really. Matter of taste; I find it horrible, just as I find Ruby syntax horrible. And I do not care about syntax too much generally (among my production langs are k and clojure) but I find this an eye sore; don’t know why but it is what it is. Edit: aaah downvotes for an opinion :) Anyway, background; I maintained a huge Rails codebase for years; it was pretty much the worst thing I ever did (in 30 years of production coding) and that was pretty much down because how much I don't like the syntax. That doesn't happen often.

iomcr 6y ago
Ruby syntax's alleged beauty is one one of its most popular features and you're in a thread about a language that intentionally copied that feature.
bovermyer 6y ago
For what it's worth, I thought your comment was reasonable given the discussion and upvoted it. You're allowed to hate Crystal's syntax. I'd be curious to hear why, though.
mekster 6y ago
I don't like rails either but I like ruby syntax. You're sure you don't like ruby and not rails? You got downvoted for not liking something "just because". (I didn't downvote.)
- tluyben2 6y ago
  Is that not a matter of taste means? I even say I do not know why; I just break out in hives when I open a ruby file. When I open up a file to start programming, I have to have some feeling of ‘let’s do it’; I have that with most languages but with ruby I just think ‘crap this is ugly’. Not sure how to explain that; it is more like trying to explain why I prefer Klee over Rembrandt. I guess some people can but I cannot put that into words.
  - mekster 6y ago
    I share the same feeling when opening up rails project because of their own weird rules and files being all over the place. I don't feel that when writing a single ruby file and feel elegant.
    - tluyben2 6y ago
      I don't know... http://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Mutual_recursion#Ruby http://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Mutual_recursion#Ruby I find almost every other implementation better on the eyes; picolisp, pari/gp, nim and some others I would call elegant; the Ruby version looks like overly noisy and fairly ugly to me. Not so much (but still) the function defs, but p (Array.new(20) {|n| F(n) }) I find pretty nasty for some reason (again, not sure why). Randomly picked example.