3 ms·
I think Jane Street is single-handedly keeping OCaml a production-level language (which is a good thing, because it's a great mix of functional programming with
by hvs 6y ago
I think Jane Street is single-handedly keeping OCaml a production-level language (which is a good thing, because it's a great mix of functional programming with a practical/pragmatic approach). If you haven't tried OCaml (or F# which is based on it), I highly recommend it.
- 52-6F-62 6y agoHow do you think it would go learning "backwards" from Elixir (which I'm currently learning w/ Phoenix for another purpose)? I've glimpsed through Reason/Bucklescript but never spent real time in them.
- hvs 6y agoI'm not familiar with Elixir, so I can't speak to that. But I would say that once you are familiar with functional programming, the choice of language comes down to what stack your company already uses, library support, and problem area. For instance, I would love to use OCaml, but we are primarily a dotnet house, so I use F# when I can. For Spark stuff, I use Scala. I'm not a language zealot, I prefer to use functional languages, and encourage their use when I can, but I use the best tool for the job within the constraints of the environment I'm working in. Not sure that's helpful, but I would just say if you are using Elixir you're probably already in a good place development-wise.
- Scarbutt 6y agoIs there any reason learn OCaml over F# for a new project?
- hvs 6y agoI would look at what libraries you need. If you're a Microsoft house, I would go with F#. If performance is the highest priority, I would go with OCaml.
- claydavisss 6y agoTo turn this around a bit, I don't think dispensing with F# is that difficult. Practically everything interesting comes from the .Net SDKs and as a result, any nontrivial F# code will be sprinkled with C#-style API calls etc. I expected a friendlier Haskell but then realized it was more like a Typescript for C#.