News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Introduction to Functional Programming in OCaml by scns on Thursday August 23, 2018 @10:22AM (#17827466)
Why should they when it gets used and makes them money?
Re:Introduction to Functional Programming in OCaml by fsloth on Thursday August 23, 2018 @10:45AM (#17827673)
A usable industrial strength tool needs more than just the compiler and a repl.

The main benefit of an industrial language is the entire toolchain including IDE with code higlighting, intellisense capabilities, debugging capabilities, etc. To provide these for F# in Visual Studio requires continuous investment.

Hence, given the not-entirely-committed feel MS is emanating just now for it, if they don't feel supporting F# as a first class citizen on visual studio is worth the investment, they might orphan it to to open source developers. Who probably would hold good care of the core facilities, but would probably lack resources and interest to provide an entire industrial strength stack. I do hope this is not the scenario, and Microsoft will continue investing in the language as a first class citizen on visual studio.

Re:Introduction to Functional Programming in OCaml by phillipcarter on Thursday August 23, 2018 @12:20PM (#17828505)
You can check out some of the investments we've been making for F# holistically here: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2018/08/14/announcin...

(lots of language stuff at the beginning, but there's a tools and "what we're thinking of next" section afterwards)

Re:Introduction to Functional Programming in OCaml by pjmlp on Friday August 24, 2018 @06:46AM (#17834092)
Thinking of next, as usual is only interesting for the usual type provider demos, not for the working programmer using C# and VB.NET across EF, Forms, WPF, UWP, ASP.NET MVC, IoT Core, HoloLens.
Re:Introduction to Functional Programming in OCaml by fsloth on Friday August 24, 2018 @08:53AM (#17834598)
This. As an industrial programmer: F# was awesome 10 years ago, I don't really crave for new language features. I want an industrial strength tooling and ecosystem to support this awesome language, not new language features.

To be painfully blunt: The language is really nice as it is. I would prefer it would expand on the bolted-on batteries included utilities rather than new contrived ways of code golfing.

What is critical from industrial point of view that the fundamentals are now and "forever" rock solid. Not how many new language features it will gain.

See C for reference. Nobody uses C because it gets new ways to write shorter code. People choose C for stability[0], not because it's horrible language or because it's a beautiful language.

F# would be fantastical, if it would ossify like C. Then I could write it for the rest of my programming career.

[0] Yes, C moves forward, but with a geological pace

Re:Introduction to Functional Programming in OCaml by phillipcarter on Friday August 24, 2018 @11:55AM (#17835716)
I think your definition of "working programmer" is a lot more specific than you're implying here. There are numerous working programmers using F# successfully today, in a broad number of scenarios. Machine Learning is our next one to tackle.
Re:Introduction to Functional Programming in OCaml by pjmlp on Friday August 24, 2018 @03:28PM (#17837275)
I don't need F# for ML.NET and still get to use it on the above scenarios where F# gets a no entry to play allowance.