3 ms·

> As the sibling replier noted, SAFE appears to be hosting-provider-specific. > "okay make the A mean something else then!") Yeah, the website really makes it

> As the sibling replier noted, SAFE appears to be hosting-provider-specific. > "okay make the A mean something else then!") Yeah, the website really makes it seem like that. Personally, I fully agree that it shouldn't be vendor bound at all (not even a mention). Along with that, I actually am somewaht using it on the bare metal. > As for my generic opinion on the rest, ... For me, the big draw to it is that it is f# from end to end (for the most part), and that in turn enables FP and type safety. This is, IMO, the 10x value proposition of it. Similar to how LISP and its dialects allow you to do MUCH faster dev cylces. And IMO it does "get out of the way" > ... Does this do that? Maybe? I lack the experience to give a qualified opinion on that. > Secondly, regarding your curiosity about whether this thing will languish and die... for what reasons might that be especially important? I know that technical merit isn't really the biggest or even a big factor in adoption. I think of dang as almost uniquely qualified in regards to web stacks, as he also doesn't use one of the common ones. And so he may have a perspective on whether people would be likely to adopt it based on usability. Because I know dang is busy, I added the part about replying if it isn't trouble for him. Sorry, for this badly worded/thought out comment, I suck at English.

exikyut 5y ago
> Along with that, I actually am somewaht using it on the bare metal. Cool. > For me, the big draw to it is that it is f# from end to end (for the most part), and that in turn enables FP and type safety. This is, IMO, the 10x value proposition of it. Similar to how LISP and its dialects allow you to do MUCH faster dev cylces. And IMO it does "get out of the way" I've only played around with F# a very tiny amount, and the majority of my experience consists of noting that its VM warmup time is a tad slow. (I "grew up" on PHP at the CLI, so I'm used to 20-50µs of overhead... woops.) Once I solve the I Have Really Slow Hardware™ problem I expect I'll give F# a proper look (since then I'll have no excuses lol). I've been interested in functional programming for a while. I was referring to the whole SAFE stack getting out of the way, being that I was criticizing SAFE's vision (albeit without being able to substantiate my critique with any domain-specific knowledge, haha). But if it's just a thin wrapper and a set of conventions, then maybe (I don't have the domain knowledge to discern myself) it actually does that well. > I know that technical merit isn't really the biggest or even a big factor in adoption. Sadly :( > I think of dang as almost uniquely qualified in regards to web stacks, as he also doesn't use one of the common ones. And so he may have a perspective on whether people would be likely to adopt it based on usability. Well now I'm curious too :P > Sorry, for this badly worded/thought out comment, I suck at English. FWIW, I've had both zero issues understanding your points AND zero instances of "...that {word/sentence/thing} doesn't belong there", so... :)

exikyut 5y ago

> Along with that, I actually am somewaht using it on the bare metal. Cool. > For me, the big draw to it is that it is f# from end to end (for the most part), and that in turn enables FP and type safety. This is, IMO, the 10x value proposition of it. Similar to how LISP and its dialects allow you to do MUCH faster dev cylces. And IMO it does "get out of the way" I've only played around with F# a very tiny amount, and the majority of my experience consists of noting that its VM warmup time is a tad slow. (I "grew up" on PHP at the CLI, so I'm used to 20-50µs of overhead... woops.) Once I solve the I Have Really Slow Hardware™ problem I expect I'll give F# a proper look (since then I'll have no excuses lol). I've been interested in functional programming for a while. I was referring to the whole SAFE stack getting out of the way, being that I was criticizing SAFE's vision (albeit without being able to substantiate my critique with any domain-specific knowledge, haha). But if it's just a thin wrapper and a set of conventions, then maybe (I don't have the domain knowledge to discern myself) it actually does that well. > I know that technical merit isn't really the biggest or even a big factor in adoption. Sadly :( > I think of dang as almost uniquely qualified in regards to web stacks, as he also doesn't use one of the common ones. And so he may have a perspective on whether people would be likely to adopt it based on usability. Well now I'm curious too :P > Sorry, for this badly worded/thought out comment, I suck at English. FWIW, I've had both zero issues understanding your points AND zero instances of "...that {word/sentence/thing} doesn't belong there", so... :)