The BEAM needs an APL-y language

Re:The BEAM needs an APL-y language by skrebbel on Monday April 03, 2023 @10:09AM (#35423827)

At the risk of hijacking this discussion, i feel like the BEAM needs a TypeScript/C#/Java like language much more urgently. Whenever I go from our Elixir backend to our TypeScript frontend I experience a sigh of relief because my editor tells me instantly whether what I type makes sense and why not.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The BEAM needs an APL-y language by dangets on Monday April 03, 2023 @10:41AM (#35424407)

Are you only missing types? Gleam is supposed to be designed towards that: https://gleam.run/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The BEAM needs an APL-y language by weatherlight on Monday April 03, 2023 @12:34PM (#35426809)

Gleam is kinda awesome :) the type system is more like Standard ML tha Java's, but the syntax should be familiar enough for anyone coming from a C like syntax.

I feel the hard part about jumping from something like C# to something like Gleam isn't the syntax, it's learning the semantics. once you learn the semantics, it's easy to pickup new syntaxes, regardless of the language.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The BEAM needs an APL-y language by rektide on Monday April 03, 2023 @01:18PM (#35427657)

Shout out to the Gleam v0.28 thread from today,

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35425855

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The BEAM needs an APL-y language by rektide on Monday April 03, 2023 @12:50PM (#35427155)

I'd also love if dynamic/untyped languages would up their IDE game.

I think much of the same badass code completion would be possible, if we have a live system with real objects to code against.

[ Parent | on HN ]