News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby. Parent comment

Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by banachtarski on Thursday August 04, 2016 @01:17PM (#12227045)
He said decent type system, not static one.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by smnplk on Thursday August 04, 2016 @02:18PM (#12227429)
How can someone enjoy javascript ? Even closures are not done right and now they added classes. Just what we need sigh
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by kminehart on Thursday August 04, 2016 @02:34PM (#12227540)
I agree, classes are silly in JavaScript. It just masks the prototype and creates ambiguity; using the prototype effectively is part of being a good JavaScript developer.

I understand the hate and everything but honestly I think it presents a fun and refreshing way of solving problems.

Also npm is pretty awesome, aside from how massive the node_modules folder gets.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by kminehart on Thursday August 04, 2016 @02:17PM (#12227417)
C, Java, and C# have decent type systems, especially compared to JavaScript.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by smnplk on Thursday August 04, 2016 @02:35PM (#12227551)
They wouldn't say C is "weakly typed" if its type system was decent :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by lmm on Friday August 05, 2016 @04:45AM (#12230849)
No sum types, no higher-kinded types, huge verbosity in declaring a new type. I'm talking something like OCaml/F#/Scala/Haskell.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby by mike_hearn on Friday August 05, 2016 @09:01AM (#12231928)
The type systems of Java and C# are OK. C is not even in the same league.
[ Parent | on HN ]