4 ms·

You should give Dart a try, it's a lovely language. and very easy to pick up. In fact, it's become my favorite of the modern languages. For perspective, I come

by vsnf 3y ago

You should give Dart a try, it's a lovely language. and very easy to pick up. In fact, it's become my favorite of the modern languages. For perspective, I come from a primarily Java/C# background, with large smatterings of Python, JS/TS, and Go, not to mention other less popular languages. I would describe it as C#-lite. It's got all the features of a modern C-derived language with very little of the accumulated complexity. It's got pattern matching, tuple-syntax, a very strong constructor syntax, first class functions (this has become table stakes in the past decade but not so long ago it wasn't)... It's just a well balanced and very pleasant language.

zigzag312 3y ago
- no threads (isolates are much more limited) - no value types - missing fundamental integer types (eg. 64 bit unsigned integer) - no data classes (records are anonymous) - no tagged unions - no static metaprogramming (macros coming soon) - limited constructors (initializer list expression can't use earlier values in the list, no object initializers) List<int> is still too often used in APIs instead of Uint8List, even though it has 8x overhead. Slower than C#, Java, Kotlin & Go. Performance is same as JS (even though it's statically-typed, AOT compiled language).
- vsnf 3y ago
  I'm hardly the Dart Defense Force, so I'm not about to justify all their choices, and I share a lot of your annoyances, especially re: threads, data classes, and tagged unions, but what does people using List<int> have to do with Dart itself? I don't hate on Java-the-language because the libraries are full of BeanFactoryFactory(). Still, I stand by my claim that it's C#-lite.
  - zigzag312 3y ago
    You can't do List<byte>, but need to use special types like Uint8List. This was not always available, so List<int> is sometimes still used even in official Google libraries. If it had value types you wouldn't need these special lists. I agree that overall it feels like C#-lite, plus some baggage from early days when it was designed as an alternative to JS. It will probably become really nice language in a few years.
- xster 3y ago
  > Performance is same as JS Is there a source?
  - zigzag312 3y ago
    https://github.com/jinyus/related_post_gen https://github.com/jinyus/related_post_gen

by vsnf 3y ago

zigzag312 3y ago

- no threads (isolates are much more limited) - no value types - missing fundamental integer types (eg. 64 bit unsigned integer) - no data classes (records are anonymous) - no tagged unions - no static metaprogramming (macros coming soon) - limited constructors (initializer list expression can't use earlier values in the list, no object initializers) List<int> is still too often used in APIs instead of Uint8List, even though it has 8x overhead. Slower than C#, Java, Kotlin & Go. Performance is same as JS (even though it's statically-typed, AOT compiled language).

vsnf 3y ago
I'm hardly the Dart Defense Force, so I'm not about to justify all their choices, and I share a lot of your annoyances, especially re: threads, data classes, and tagged unions, but what does people using List<int> have to do with Dart itself? I don't hate on Java-the-language because the libraries are full of BeanFactoryFactory(). Still, I stand by my claim that it's C#-lite.
- zigzag312 3y ago
  You can't do List<byte>, but need to use special types like Uint8List. This was not always available, so List<int> is sometimes still used even in official Google libraries. If it had value types you wouldn't need these special lists. I agree that overall it feels like C#-lite, plus some baggage from early days when it was designed as an alternative to JS. It will probably become really nice language in a few years.
xster 3y ago
> Performance is same as JS Is there a source?
- zigzag312 3y ago
  https://github.com/jinyus/related_post_gen https://github.com/jinyus/related_post_gen