News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by faitswulff on Monday March 30, 2020 @01:00PM (#22729774)
I don't yet use Crystal, but it's kind of painful that Windows support is in the "What can wait? - after 1.0" section. Cross-platform support is one of the reasons I've been diving into Rust.

However "we integrated a CI for Windows to ensure we continue moving steadily forward" sounds like a good compromise for limited resources.

Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by nicoburns on Monday March 30, 2020 @02:23PM (#22730673)
Yeah, especially as the idea that adding windows support won't end up affecting public APIs is pretty naive. Windows and unix-like systems have very different APIs for lot's of things, and it's very easy to fall into designing something unix-specific if you don't make it cross-platform from the start.
Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by htns on Monday March 30, 2020 @03:09PM (#22731196)
Crystal mostly copies ruby, so it's probably not that naive (though actually I don't know how ruby is on windows).
Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by e12e on Monday March 30, 2020 @06:34PM (#22732901)
Ruby has a pretty solid Api story on windows (meaning code and gems generally work) - but it's not quite a tier one platform - it's gotten better, but eg automatic compilation of c level extensions isn't quite as good as on Linux. This mostly stems from using msys and not vc++ - and is similar to the issues python used to face on windows. But if I'm not mistaken python moved to vc a while after community edition became a thing.

We're also running some rather old code (w old versions of ruby) - and that's obviously not great - but also somewhat worse on windows than on Linux.

All that might make it sounds like ruby on windows is tricky - but it really has gotten quite great, especially after 2.4.

Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by Lio on Monday March 30, 2020 @04:02PM (#22731727)
I wonder if this problem won’t go away after WSL2.0?

How far away are we from a Windows that can run Unix/POSIX out of the box?

Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by al-king on Tuesday March 31, 2020 @01:05AM (#22735063)
If anything WSL2.0 has made it clearer than WSL is a development environment, not a universal compatibility layer.
Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by pjmlp on Tuesday March 31, 2020 @02:34AM (#22735372)
WSL is an effort to bring into Windows the crowd that buys macbooks to develop GNU/Linux software, as they are unwilling to support Linux OEMs.

The Windows developer community at large, just like Apple developers, isn't that much into UNIX compatibility layers.

Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by moonchild on Monday March 30, 2020 @06:11PM (#22732747)
I find it a little sad that windows support is considered essential (and its lack is a dealbreaker), but linux support is not, even though developers predominantly use macos and linux.
Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by AlchemistCamp on Monday March 30, 2020 @08:57PM (#22733942)
Why do you believe more devs are on mac than windows? What country are you in?
Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by ricardobeat on Monday March 30, 2020 @07:03PM (#22733074)
What makes you say linux support is not essential?
Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by e12e on Monday March 30, 2020 @06:41PM (#22732942)
If you compare to ruby, there are a couple of quite nice packages for os automation that allows for scripting setup of services etc. That's a space where os level support is essential.

That said, crystal being new, and wsl 1/2 being a thing... I'm à little surprised for the demand for a windows version.

OTOH being able to create a gui rad ide like Lazarus or Delphi, that is cross-platform, compiles to native executables and uses crystal in place of Pascal would probably be great.

Re:Towards Crystal 1.0 by AlchemistCamp on Monday March 30, 2020 @08:56PM (#22733933)
It's the same mistake so many Ruby projects made 15 years ago. Python, on the other hand, was aggressively cross-platform.