4 ms·

haXe has been around for a long time, so it should be pretty solid. I played around with it in 2003 or 2004 because I wanted to have a way of writing flash appl

haXe has been around for a long time, so it should be pretty solid. I played around with it in 2003 or 2004 because I wanted to have a way of writing flash applications in a good editor like Vim instead of the frighteningly bad Flash Editor. And I wanted to work under Linux. The main problem why it never got traction is probably that it is aiming for too much at once. If you try to do everything, you're just mediocre across the board. It may spit out JS, but how do you use advanced frameworks like Jquery in there? It may spit out C++, but how advanced is that code, and what if you want to use GTK or even Qt. From what I understood, you're pretty much limited to what haXe has to offer. And that, on the other hand, limits your choice of what you can implement. Granted, you could port stuff over, but then it's more work again. Instead, it may be smarter to know 2-3 dedicated languages for specific tasks. This also helps you to understand and port different design patterns back and forth.

reitzensteinm 15y ago
I think it did bite off more than it could chew in the beginning, but it's really coming together these days. You can link in with third party libraries just fine, though only by calling a Haxe like external interface functions, so you'd probably write your jquery in separate files. It's no silver bullet, and I'd probably still agree with your assessment of using tools designed for the job - my web stack is Django + hand written javascript/jquery + node.js for multiplayer. But I think it's well worth checking out for the news.yc crowd. I believe something similar will eventually win out - being able to write every part of a stack in the same language - but that language is probably destined to be Javascript.
- terhechte 15y ago
  I concur that it is interesting. I mostly wondered why it didn't catch on since it's been available for so long already. Also, for certain niches, like simpler games, it is probably a great solution since you can create it once and then publish / sell it on multiple platforms. I'm also pretty sure that someday Ruby or Java or Javascript or Python will evolve into something which runs on almost any platform. Already, you can compile Java to Javascript, Python to Javascript, and so on. Especialy the LLVM is going to allow for way more inter-language swizzling.
- Cushman 15y ago
  Yeah... Node answers that elegantly. Writing in a third language which compiles to JavaScript and PHP, well... doesn't. I hope this doesn't get taken the wrong way, because it looks like a very competent effort, but I think the main reason it hasn't "taken off" is that HaXe has the hallmarks of a language designed by committee on game dev forums. "So it looks like Java, acts like JavaScript, and compiles into C++, Flash and PHP? That's awesome!" Sounds awesome to an indie game dev. Sounds hideous to a hipster web developer.
- neutronicus 15y ago
  Clojure seems to be gunning for the "whole-stack" crown with ClojureScript.
ZoFreX 15y ago
You could always invert it. Any situation that requires a lot of logic but not much interfacing could be handled with haXe - maybe you need a particular algorithm, in JS and C++. Rather than try to interface with JS or C++ in Haxe, could you "write once" the library you need in Haxe, compile it down, and interface with it?

reitzensteinm 15y ago

I think it did bite off more than it could chew in the beginning, but it's really coming together these days. You can link in with third party libraries just fine, though only by calling a Haxe like external interface functions, so you'd probably write your jquery in separate files. It's no silver bullet, and I'd probably still agree with your assessment of using tools designed for the job - my web stack is Django + hand written javascript/jquery + node.js for multiplayer. But I think it's well worth checking out for the news.yc crowd. I believe something similar will eventually win out - being able to write every part of a stack in the same language - but that language is probably destined to be Javascript.

terhechte 15y ago
I concur that it is interesting. I mostly wondered why it didn't catch on since it's been available for so long already. Also, for certain niches, like simpler games, it is probably a great solution since you can create it once and then publish / sell it on multiple platforms. I'm also pretty sure that someday Ruby or Java or Javascript or Python will evolve into something which runs on almost any platform. Already, you can compile Java to Javascript, Python to Javascript, and so on. Especialy the LLVM is going to allow for way more inter-language swizzling.
Cushman 15y ago
Yeah... Node answers that elegantly. Writing in a third language which compiles to JavaScript and PHP, well... doesn't. I hope this doesn't get taken the wrong way, because it looks like a very competent effort, but I think the main reason it hasn't "taken off" is that HaXe has the hallmarks of a language designed by committee on game dev forums. "So it looks like Java, acts like JavaScript, and compiles into C++, Flash and PHP? That's awesome!" Sounds awesome to an indie game dev. Sounds hideous to a hipster web developer.
neutronicus 15y ago
Clojure seems to be gunning for the "whole-stack" crown with ClojureScript.

ZoFreX 15y ago

You could always invert it. Any situation that requires a lot of logic but not much interfacing could be handled with haXe - maybe you need a particular algorithm, in JS and C++. Rather than try to interface with JS or C++ in Haxe, could you "write once" the library you need in Haxe, compile it down, and interface with it?