4 ms·
(…on Stripe API…) OCaml: 1 (last change was 8 years ago, so it’s more like zero) I’ve been using OCaml for some time, primarily for my pet project, but als
by xlii 2y ago
(…on Stripe API…)
OCaml: 1 (last change was 8 years ago, so it’s more like zero)
I’ve been using OCaml for some time, primarily for my pet project, but also and some minor at-work utilities. One such thing was interacting with Datadog which, unsurprisingly, doesn’t provide OCaml SDK.
In short: Experience was great. Not only implementing specs with provided specs while using OCaml tooling was fast but also when I got to the rate limiting, I’ve been able to refactor code in around 20 minutes and then it felt like magic transformation.
My take away from that experience is that I wouldn’t use library availability as a hard argument. Every external library is liability and if language provides comfortable tooling and helpers then probably having own code on use-adequate level of abstraction (instead of high level kitchen sink) might preferred.
For high number of external integration I would use something like Go instead, which has exactly that, but as an API implementer I’d prefer to use OCaml instead.
- cassepipe 2y agoIsn't what you are describing the curse of Lisps ? That is it is so easy to just roll your own but that there is no third-party consensual libraries and since there isn't there is little adoption ?
- skydhash 2y agoThere are libraries like cl—ppcre or alexandria. The fact is most features are trivially implemented that you don’t need that much external libraries. Most are glue code anyway. And with lisp, as soon as you can translate the data structures, you can use the available functions in the standard packages. So you may want that github sdk, but in truth you’re only going to use 2 to 5 functions. Why not get an http package and add the few line of codes for these?