4 ms·

maybe that’s it; maybe it kind of sits in the middle where it tries to please everyone and ends up pleasing no one. not a great functional language, but functio

• carlmr 5y ago
  I've written this before. The issue is not because it's functional at all. That's a proximate explanation that's just plain false. Everyone I know that has tried Nix was a functional programmer first. Nobody had a good experience with Nix though. If I could describe my issues with Nix it's that: 1. The syntax is odd. It's usually better not to stray too far from common programming languages if you want your language to be accepted. 2. You often find two examples which work individually, but they use a different way to do things, so it's hard to get them to work together in the same configuration. 3. A lot of examples depend on some specific functions, which are hardly explained at all. There seem to be a lot of these special functions that make it very hard to make a mental model you can work from. 4. The error messages are worse than C++ templating errors. 5. At least last I checked the documentation was really lengthy, but never gave a good overview of the language, only gave some inconsistent examples instead. In the end you don't feel like you learned something.