3 ms·

But F# is stable, officially supported (as one of the three - VB.Net, C#, F#) - and comes with this _now_. I like the language a lot and think that it has grea

But F# is stable, officially supported (as one of the three - VB.Net, C#, F#) - and comes with this _now_. I like the language a lot and think that it has great potential. It's a shame that there's so little weight behind it so far, ignoring niche markets (banks for example).

hvs 15y ago
It took Python and Ruby over 10 years to break into the "big time". F#, while really cool, still doesn't have its "killer app" to drive adoption. Keep in mind, F# only just became a first-class language in the MS suite with VS2010. Give it time.
- runevault 15y ago
  And they didn't release an f# express, you have to install shell and then install the f# runtime on top of that, instead of just one simple install the way c# and vb.net is. It isn't the end of the world but seems stupid if they want to increase adoption of the language.
  - panesofglass 15y ago
    That's because it's not an Express -- i.e. stripped down -- version. It's the full package. You can easily use F# from the command line, as you can with Ruby and Python. F# is also open sourced [1], so you can also build and run it on *nix with Mono [2]. Why would I want an Express edition? [1] https://github.com/fsharp/fsharp https://github.com/fsharp/fsharp [2] http://chrismarinos.com/f-on-ubuntu-linux-with-mono-and-monodevelop/ http://chrismarinos.com/f-on-ubuntu-linux-with-mono-and-mono...