7 ms·

The minimum requirement for a language to take off: first class Windows support. The current preview support is good enough to start playing. A high-performance

by zerr 3y ago

The minimum requirement for a language to take off: first class Windows support. The current preview support is good enough to start playing. A high-performance (C-like, LLVM based) and a very high-level language with Ruby-like expressiveness coupled with static typing and compile-time (as well as runtime) safety, and with the ability to produce standalone native executables make it really one of a kind.

notmypenguin 3y ago
Honestly, windows isn’t something I can take seriously in 2023. Developers should be using the same Linux distro their servers run, IMO. Does that sound harsh? So does dismissing a language due to “windows support”
- ungamedplayer 3y ago
  Go ask AWS for their kernel that boots AWS. It won't boot your laptop.
Alifatisk 3y ago
This hits the point
pmarreck 3y ago
> The minimum requirement for a language to take off: first class Windows support many open source languages “made it” without this qualification, and I’d suggest that Microsoft has a long history of primarily supporting its ecosystem languages on its platform.
- metaltyphoon 3y ago
  Can you name a language that “made it” and what you mean by “make it”?
  - pmarreck 3y ago
    Bash? Ruby earlier on? Node earlier on? Erlang? Elixir? Perl, earlier on? Clojure? Go earlier on? All the standard Unix utilities and their DSL's? (sed, awk, bc, jq, etc.) Apple's Objective-C/Cocoa, and Swift? Rust (earlier on)? Scala? Haskell? Every one of these languages' Windows support tends to lag their *nix support, and most are fairly widely deployed (my definition of "making it"). Many may support Windows now to some degree, but did not originally and not for their entire incubation period. Early Python did not have good Windows support. Neither did PHP... which is exactly why Microsoft basically copied PHP to make ASP. Hell, even C/C++ was basically fleshed out on Unixes long before Windows even existed. Linux (and Unix flavors before it, as well as things like BSD) is the premiere developer OS, period. It enjoys, by far, the most languages to choose from. Windows is the developer OS only for the Windows ecosystem of technologies, which is far too limiting IMHO. The fact that you've even asked this question makes me think you are living under a Redmond rock. If you didn't have access to WSL, you wouldn't even be able to fully enjoy most of these languages. Which is exactly why WSL exists! No one would need it otherwise! In fact, the only open-source language I can think of that DID premiere with first-class Windows support was Java.
    - JoelMcCracken 3y ago
      I'm not sure, but I would be surprised if early node had good windows support before it became big.
      - pmarreck 3y ago
        Right, which is why I said “Node earlier on” (as in, without good Windows support yet)
latexr 3y ago
> The minimum requirement for a language to take off: first class Windows support. Swift is doing quite well, and it didn’t need Windows support to drive adoption.
- zerr 3y ago
  Windows support... OR being a native SDK language for a popular platform, which Crystal is not. I also hear ABAP is doing fine on the SAP platform.
- metaltyphoon 3y ago
  Swift is necessary on macOS and is doing fairly poor outside of it because it didn't have Windows and Linux support on par.
  - latexr 3y ago
    The original comment claimed a language needs first class Windows support at a minimum to take off. Swift proves that is not a hard requirement, regardless of the reason for its popularity: that it’s the official vendor-supported language for a family of platforms that have been profitable for developers. That Swift isn’t as popular outside the officially supported platforms isn’t surprising and doesn’t matter. The point is precisely that it didn’t have to cater to a specific one (Windows) to achieve success.
    - poulpy123 3y ago
      Yes you don't need to be on windows if you have a quasi monopoly on 1 billion devices. But except swift and java there is no language that can pretend to it.
      - notmypenguin 3y ago
        If it wasn’t for the fact M$ preloaded Windows on nearly all OEM computers due to some seriously mafia-esque business practices we wouldn’t have to consider that OS at all. Two can play at that metaphor game
npn 3y ago
Almost there. From now on it it's only matter of developer experience. Like provide a installer which do all the necessary setup for you, including install Visual C++ Build Tools, LLVM and other stuff. Then the community need to update the libraries to make them run smoothly on Windows, too. But this is not that hard. My major annoyed point for using Crystal in Windows now is the native libraries, which need extra build steps that sometime not very straight forward. But I think we can overcome it with some extra effort from the community: provide the compiled lib/dll files beforehand so other people do not have to compile the native library all over again. This will also take time, but unlike the previous challenges, it's mostly the DX now.

by zerr 3y ago

notmypenguin 3y ago

Honestly, windows isn’t something I can take seriously in 2023. Developers should be using the same Linux distro their servers run, IMO. Does that sound harsh? So does dismissing a language due to “windows support”

ungamedplayer 3y ago
Go ask AWS for their kernel that boots AWS. It won't boot your laptop.

Alifatisk 3y ago

This hits the point

pmarreck 3y ago

> The minimum requirement for a language to take off: first class Windows support many open source languages “made it” without this qualification, and I’d suggest that Microsoft has a long history of primarily supporting its ecosystem languages on its platform.

metaltyphoon 3y ago
Can you name a language that “made it” and what you mean by “make it”?
- pmarreck 3y ago
  Bash? Ruby earlier on? Node earlier on? Erlang? Elixir? Perl, earlier on? Clojure? Go earlier on? All the standard Unix utilities and their DSL's? (sed, awk, bc, jq, etc.) Apple's Objective-C/Cocoa, and Swift? Rust (earlier on)? Scala? Haskell? Every one of these languages' Windows support tends to lag their *nix support, and most are fairly widely deployed (my definition of "making it"). Many may support Windows now to some degree, but did not originally and not for their entire incubation period. Early Python did not have good Windows support. Neither did PHP... which is exactly why Microsoft basically copied PHP to make ASP. Hell, even C/C++ was basically fleshed out on Unixes long before Windows even existed. Linux (and Unix flavors before it, as well as things like BSD) is the premiere developer OS, period. It enjoys, by far, the most languages to choose from. Windows is the developer OS only for the Windows ecosystem of technologies, which is far too limiting IMHO. The fact that you've even asked this question makes me think you are living under a Redmond rock. If you didn't have access to WSL, you wouldn't even be able to fully enjoy most of these languages. Which is exactly why WSL exists! No one would need it otherwise! In fact, the only open-source language I can think of that DID premiere with first-class Windows support was Java.
  - JoelMcCracken 3y ago
    I'm not sure, but I would be surprised if early node had good windows support before it became big.
    - pmarreck 3y ago
      Right, which is why I said “Node earlier on” (as in, without good Windows support yet)

latexr 3y ago

> The minimum requirement for a language to take off: first class Windows support. Swift is doing quite well, and it didn’t need Windows support to drive adoption.

zerr 3y ago
Windows support... OR being a native SDK language for a popular platform, which Crystal is not. I also hear ABAP is doing fine on the SAP platform.
metaltyphoon 3y ago
Swift is necessary on macOS and is doing fairly poor outside of it because it didn't have Windows and Linux support on par.
- latexr 3y ago
  The original comment claimed a language needs first class Windows support at a minimum to take off. Swift proves that is not a hard requirement, regardless of the reason for its popularity: that it’s the official vendor-supported language for a family of platforms that have been profitable for developers. That Swift isn’t as popular outside the officially supported platforms isn’t surprising and doesn’t matter. The point is precisely that it didn’t have to cater to a specific one (Windows) to achieve success.
  - poulpy123 3y ago
    Yes you don't need to be on windows if you have a quasi monopoly on 1 billion devices. But except swift and java there is no language that can pretend to it.
    - notmypenguin 3y ago
      If it wasn’t for the fact M$ preloaded Windows on nearly all OEM computers due to some seriously mafia-esque business practices we wouldn’t have to consider that OS at all. Two can play at that metaphor game

npn 3y ago

Almost there. From now on it it's only matter of developer experience. Like provide a installer which do all the necessary setup for you, including install Visual C++ Build Tools, LLVM and other stuff. Then the community need to update the libraries to make them run smoothly on Windows, too. But this is not that hard. My major annoyed point for using Crystal in Windows now is the native libraries, which need extra build steps that sometime not very straight forward. But I think we can overcome it with some extra effort from the community: provide the compiled lib/dll files beforehand so other people do not have to compile the native library all over again. This will also take time, but unlike the previous challenges, it's mostly the DX now.