Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby

Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by kristianp on Thursday August 04, 2016 @02:18AM (#12223745)

Maybe the makers of Crystal need to take a leaf out of Go's book. Despite the Go creators not being windows users (AFAIK), they support Windows as a primary target, to help adoption, I assume.

Of course the Crystal people probably don't have the same number of developers working on it as Go did even early on.

Edit: Go took a little while to support windows, not until around July 2010. See this question from November 2009: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1717652/can-go-compiler-b...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by RX14 on Thursday August 04, 2016 @06:41AM (#12224652)

The plan is to support windows before 1.0, although the core devs are reluctant to "open up" to the large amount of developers windows support would bring before they are finished making breaking changes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by rogerdpack on Thursday August 04, 2016 @06:17PM (#12228856)

I don't think they're afraid of it, more like haven't gotten around to it would be my guess...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by spoiler on Thursday August 04, 2016 @04:49AM (#12224284)

Crystal supported Windows (albeit unofficially, and it was an epic adventure to compile it, and I've never tried running any serious code on it), however all support practically ceased when it switched from libpcl to inline ASM for coroutines.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by pyed on Thursday August 04, 2016 @02:58AM (#12223891)

Windows support was implemented by the community, Not the creators.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by naviix on Thursday August 04, 2016 @11:44AM (#12226293)

not to take away from the point you're trying to make, but i just installed it on windows 10 with the latest update that included bash. felt nice.

[ Parent | on HN ]