3 ms·

I feel like there's space for imperative, garbage collected, pattern matching, and ADT language. Just Golang + pattern matching + ADT. I would be soooooooooooo

I feel like there's space for imperative, garbage collected, pattern matching, and ADT language. Just Golang + pattern matching + ADT. I would be sooooooooooooooooooooooooo happy. I think there ought to be a subset of Rust that uses Arc for everything, maybe with a language feature that desugars into it. Obviously this requires compilers to be able to reason and optimize out atomics.

ThePhysicist 2y ago
I think we might get these eventually in Golang, at least to a degree. In the end it's just a question whether they will be zero-cost like in Rust or incur some runtime overhead (I would assume the latter). Would be fine for me, I rely a lot on reflection for more complex use cases around dynamic typing and that already has a significant runtime cost (which is still ok in most cases).
russell_h 2y ago
I wouldn’t use this in production, but this was in HN earlier this year and I love the idea: https://github.com/borgo-lang/borgo https://github.com/borgo-lang/borgo
zokier 2y ago
Ocaml, F#, Reason, ReScript, Scala? Or any other of the million ML style languages?
- anon-3988 2y ago
  I tried OCAML, My problem with it is that it smuggles in a lot of other concepts too. Especially with the thing about bindings and mutability. Also, the syntax. Every FP languages tends to be "pure" and remove every "unnecessary" syntax to achieve some kind of "simplicity". No, I want a true cavemen language. Treat me like I'm a low IQ idiot. "This function returns Option<T> DURRR ME HAVE TO MATCH ALL. ME DON UNDERSTAND WHAT "_" CLAUSE IS. ME NO UNDERSTAND LIFETIMES, LAST TIME I WROTE THE C BINDING ME BRAIN ALL FRY". There's a space for language for people who: 1. learn the language in 1 hour 2. spend 100 hour writing the most mundane, verbose code instead of: 1. learn the language in 100 hour 2. spend 1 hour writing the most beautiful, concise and pure code
  - zokier 2y ago
    Ocaml might have lot of faults, but I can't see it being overly puristic or minimalistic.
udbhavs 2y ago
Dart has pattern matching that is a lot more fleshed out than most C-family languages, you should check it out https://dart.dev/language/patterns https://dart.dev/language/patterns Edit: while there aren’t full ADTs, it does have sealed classes which help with exhaustiveness in matching
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
gr4vityWall 2y ago
Haxe is OOP by default, but it's not super forced into you, and has ADTs/pattern matching.
ComputerGuru 2y ago
C# is headed this way. Typescript is there but only if you can ignore the fact that it is JavaScript masquerading as a more serious language for halloween.
dzsekijo 2y ago
Borgo https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40211891 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40211891

ThePhysicist 2y ago

I think we might get these eventually in Golang, at least to a degree. In the end it's just a question whether they will be zero-cost like in Rust or incur some runtime overhead (I would assume the latter). Would be fine for me, I rely a lot on reflection for more complex use cases around dynamic typing and that already has a significant runtime cost (which is still ok in most cases).

russell_h 2y ago

I wouldn’t use this in production, but this was in HN earlier this year and I love the idea: https://github.com/borgo-lang/borgo https://github.com/borgo-lang/borgo

zokier 2y ago

Ocaml, F#, Reason, ReScript, Scala? Or any other of the million ML style languages?

anon-3988 2y ago
I tried OCAML, My problem with it is that it smuggles in a lot of other concepts too. Especially with the thing about bindings and mutability. Also, the syntax. Every FP languages tends to be "pure" and remove every "unnecessary" syntax to achieve some kind of "simplicity". No, I want a true cavemen language. Treat me like I'm a low IQ idiot. "This function returns Option<T> DURRR ME HAVE TO MATCH ALL. ME DON UNDERSTAND WHAT "_" CLAUSE IS. ME NO UNDERSTAND LIFETIMES, LAST TIME I WROTE THE C BINDING ME BRAIN ALL FRY". There's a space for language for people who: 1. learn the language in 1 hour 2. spend 100 hour writing the most mundane, verbose code instead of: 1. learn the language in 100 hour 2. spend 1 hour writing the most beautiful, concise and pure code
- zokier 2y ago
  Ocaml might have lot of faults, but I can't see it being overly puristic or minimalistic.

udbhavs 2y ago

Dart has pattern matching that is a lot more fleshed out than most C-family languages, you should check it out https://dart.dev/language/patterns https://dart.dev/language/patterns Edit: while there aren’t full ADTs, it does have sealed classes which help with exhaustiveness in matching

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

gr4vityWall 2y ago

Haxe is OOP by default, but it's not super forced into you, and has ADTs/pattern matching.

ComputerGuru 2y ago

C# is headed this way. Typescript is there but only if you can ignore the fact that it is JavaScript masquerading as a more serious language for halloween.

dzsekijo 2y ago

Borgo https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40211891 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40211891