Re:Dada, an Experiement by the Creators of Rust
by cmrdporcupine on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @08:56AM
(#39615995)
I learned SML/NJ and OCaml a bit over 20 years ago and liked them, but when I tried my hand at Haskell my eyes glossed over. I get its power. But I do not like its syntax, it's hard to read. And yes, the obsession with purity.
Re:Dada, an Experiement by the Creators of Rust
by sanderjd on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @09:22AM
(#39616238)
Exactly right. I quite like haskell in theory, but in practice I quite dislike both reading and writing it.
But I like ocaml both in theory and practice (also in part due to having my eyes opened to SML about 20 years ago).
Re:Dada, an Experiement by the Creators of Rust
by cmrdporcupine on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @09:43AM
(#39616449)
I actually preferred SML/NJ when I played with writing it, but OCaml "won" in the popularity contest. Some of the things that made OCaml "better" (objects, etc.) haven't aged well, either.
Still with OCaml finally supporting multicore and still getting active interest, I often ponder going back and starting a project in it someday. I really like what I see with MirageOS.
These days I just work in Rust and it's Ok.
Re:Dada, an Experiement by the Creators of Rust
by sanderjd on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @04:21PM
(#39621648)
Yep, right there with you. OCaml was only ever better in my view because it had developed enough libraries to be an actual pragmatic choice, unlike the other languages in that family. And yep, Rust is perfectly good too, IMO, but I do find that I rarely-to-never actually care about all the zero-cost abstractions that make it "hard" to use.
Also, syntax does actually matter, because it's the first thing people see, and many people are immediately turned off by unfamiliarity. Rust's choice to largely "look like" c++/java/go was a good one, for this reason.