Re:Rust-style resource management in OCaml
by catnaroek on Friday March 16, 2018 @11:01AM
(#16601110)
> Replying here since your other comment may be gone.
I deleted it because zenhack's reply was better.
> Those are arguably more important if one wants mass adoption with all the library and funding benefits that come with it.
I couldn't care less about “mass adoption”. Also, working on the Right Thing (tm) doesn't require a lot of money. It requires an intrinsic scientific motivation, and patience to polish programs until they are flawless.
> I tell language authors to ignore performance or ecosystem compatibility at their language's peril.
Performance is important, but only after correctness has been established. It doesn't matter how fast a program is if it doesn't work.
I deleted it because zenhack's reply was better.
> Those are arguably more important if one wants mass adoption with all the library and funding benefits that come with it.
I couldn't care less about “mass adoption”. Also, working on the Right Thing (tm) doesn't require a lot of money. It requires an intrinsic scientific motivation, and patience to polish programs until they are flawless.
> I tell language authors to ignore performance or ecosystem compatibility at their language's peril.
Performance is important, but only after correctness has been established. It doesn't matter how fast a program is if it doesn't work.
As for “ecosystems”, again I couldn't care less.