4 ms·
I cordially disagree. I do not find dune weird or obscure. It’s formally part of the OCaml platform: https://ocaml.org/platform https://ocaml.org/platform, whic
by cdaringe 2y ago
I cordially disagree. I do not find dune weird or obscure. It’s formally part of the OCaml platform: https://ocaml.org/platform https://ocaml.org/platform, which I think negates at least the obscure bit. It was “new” to me for a hot moment, and it’s certainly a less common format for config files (s (expressions)). However, what I see is a tool that solves concrete problems that uses a declarative, structured format (not very weird). It also has pretty great docs!
- rwmj 2y agoI have to deal with dune across all the Fedora OCaml packaging (something like 200 different upstreams) and it's quite difficult to deal with. Not the worst build system out there, but makes me a bit sad every time I have to modify something in a project.
- RandomThoughts3 2y agoDune is part of the platform mostly because it was there and was the tool used and developed by Ocaml biggest corporate user but it’s hard to disagree with it’s weird (s-expressions in a non LISP, really?) and a bit obscure. Esy seems to solve most of these issues at the costs of a tie-in to npm.
- mattpallissard 2y agoI don't find it particularly weird or obscure either. I've had to speak over the FFI a handful of times and it was honestly a better experience than go's story (which also wasn't terrible IMO). But I also recognize that I have a high pain tolerance for build systems. I will conceed though, the Tarides folks know their shit when it comes to OCaml projects.