3 ms·
I question the assertion that Hare's standard library is "anemic"; it includes a pretty decent set of batteries for many use-cases: https://docs.harelang.org h
by ddevault 4y ago
I question the assertion that Hare's standard library is "anemic"; it includes a pretty decent set of batteries for many use-cases:
https://docs.harelang.org https://docs.harelang.org
Many Hare programs will not need to have dependencies at all. We encourage a more conservative approach to dependencies than is common in many modern languages such as Cargo, PyPI, npm, Go, etc. Even dependency-heavy Hare projects will not have hundreds of dependencies, but maybe dozens at most. Think more C, not Node.
https://harelang.org/distributions/ https://harelang.org/distributions/
- nicoburns 4y agoThat does look like a decent collection of functionality, but a HashMap as mentioned in the submission seems like a pretty glaring omission. I can't remember the last time I wrote a program that didn't use a Map. Even dynamic languages that tend to be quite light on types almost universally include a map type. I can definitely see the problems with the Node "explosion of modules" approach, but if we're looking at fixing issues with C then IMO "everyone implementing their own data structures and not always with the care and attention they deserve" is right up there with things like lack of proper arrays/strings and poor null handling. It seems like it ought to be possible to find a middle ground where dependencies are easy to find, install, update and integrate with a standardised build system, but where there is a cultural norm of being conscious of dependency size and not using micro-dependencies
- ddevault 4y agoTake a look at this comment where I explained why a first-class hash map is not a good fit for Hare: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31258759 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31258759