As somebody who likes Haskell but uses Rust mainly, I put backwards compatibility (of the language and base), the way library versioning is handled (multiple versions of a dependency don't break the build), as some big reasons I avoid using it.
Conversation
You avoid Rust for how it handles library versioning? I'm maintaining a strict lack of opinion on that since Rust is so much newer that it hasn't yet encountered all the library versioning challenges older languages have.
1
Oh, I mean I use Rust because of its approach. I find it incredibly frustrating the way Cabal and OPAM require single versions of libraries in a build tree. Allowing duplicates does have issues, but I find those more tolerable. 😅
1
1
Like if I add library X to my Cabal file, and then later add library Y, there's always a chance that my library will fail to build with a confusing constraint error due to an incompatibility in some common ancestor dependency Z having an incompatible version.
1
All true, but I do think the Rust package ecosystem will hit its own strain points (e.g. tokio vs async-std today) as it grows and the pace of development gets less uniform. But we've been talking about external things almost exclusively here, and I agree, these are essential!
1
2
Oh yeah, absolutely agree with that!
1
Really hoping that Multicore OCaml's effects and handlers will provide a nice example for future languages to follow - once it lands that is! Seems like a nice way of handling the problem of ecosystems fracturing along sync/async boundaries.
1
1
I'm not well in tune with the OCaml ecosystem, but my understanding is that competing stdlibs have already (unintentionally) caused some amount of fracturing.
1
1
Oh yeah, more talking about the yet-to-land Multicore OCaml project. Which will make it easy to make functions that are polymorphic over whether or not they can be run synchronously or asynchronously.
1
2
I need to read up on that! Rust is providing a wealth of learning for everyone on that front.
1
1
Replying to
For example:
map : ('a ~> 'b) ->> list 'a ~> list 'b
which is sugar for:
map : ('a -[e]-> 'b) ->> list 'a -[e]-> list 'b
where `~>` is an effectful function, and `->>` is a pure function. This avoids stuff like Haskell's `mapM` and `mapA` etc.
Because OCaml uses effects as part of asynchronous scheduling, this means `map` can be used synchronously or asynchronously.
1
4
Oh, wow, that does look fantastic!
1
1
Show replies