3 ms·

F# is so good, such a shame so few companies use it. I have to touch C# and it's always a little bit painful after a few weeks of F# work.

arrow7000 3y ago
F# is my go-to language for new backend projects and console apps. You can be as functional as you like, with imperative/mutable/OOP escape hatches available for those rare but unavoidable times you need them
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  Have to agree. Recently decided to try out Python instead. Everyone at work wanted Python, it's popular, so why not give it a shot. In constant regret, missing the type checking in F#.
  - hmdw45 3y ago
    I haven't done so yet but I keep meaning to check out Fable's support for F#-to-Python: https://fable.io/docs/getting-started/python.html https://fable.io/docs/getting-started/python.html
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- eddythompson80 3y ago
  for console apps, F# sadly suffers from general .NET issues for console apps. Very large size (>150MB for a simple app) and at least 400-700msec startup time
  - Smaug123 3y ago
    AOT compilation is actually usable in net7, and I'm told it's got much better in net8 - massively reduces startup time (and in net8 apparently binary size too)!
    - eddythompson80 3y ago
      Interesting. I never upgraded to 7, been waiting to try 8 when it’s out. Might give the beta a try
  - Dayshine 3y ago
    My CLI is 180-185ms startup time, and about 10-20MB for a complex app (with a runtime dependency).
    - eddythompson80 3y ago
      keyword: with a runtime dependency :) For CLIs I much prefer self-contained build outputs which is quite huge when it comes to .NET unfortunately.
Keats 3y ago
Is it easy to develop in it without using Windows?
hpeter 3y ago
I concur. All the .NET devs seem to prefer C# and are afraid to go near F#. It seems to be out of their comfort zone.Once people learn to code one way, they often don't want to try new things, since C# works and pays the bills, they don't even try F#.

arrow7000 3y ago

F# is my go-to language for new backend projects and console apps. You can be as functional as you like, with imperative/mutable/OOP escape hatches available for those rare but unavoidable times you need them

FrustratedMonky 3y ago
Have to agree. Recently decided to try out Python instead. Everyone at work wanted Python, it's popular, so why not give it a shot. In constant regret, missing the type checking in F#.
- hmdw45 3y ago
  I haven't done so yet but I keep meaning to check out Fable's support for F#-to-Python: https://fable.io/docs/getting-started/python.html https://fable.io/docs/getting-started/python.html
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
eddythompson80 3y ago
for console apps, F# sadly suffers from general .NET issues for console apps. Very large size (>150MB for a simple app) and at least 400-700msec startup time
- Smaug123 3y ago
  AOT compilation is actually usable in net7, and I'm told it's got much better in net8 - massively reduces startup time (and in net8 apparently binary size too)!
  - eddythompson80 3y ago
    Interesting. I never upgraded to 7, been waiting to try 8 when it’s out. Might give the beta a try
- Dayshine 3y ago
  My CLI is 180-185ms startup time, and about 10-20MB for a complex app (with a runtime dependency).
  - eddythompson80 3y ago
    keyword: with a runtime dependency :) For CLIs I much prefer self-contained build outputs which is quite huge when it comes to .NET unfortunately.

Keats 3y ago

Is it easy to develop in it without using Windows?

hpeter 3y ago

I concur. All the .NET devs seem to prefer C# and are afraid to go near F#. It seems to be out of their comfort zone.Once people learn to code one way, they often don't want to try new things, since C# works and pays the bills, they don't even try F#.