Re: [Caml-list] IDE like PyCharm - Results

[Allan Wegan <allanwegan@allanwegan.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3203 bytes --]

>> emacs:
>> Already got two operating systems to use and don't want to learn
>> another one. I know, you all *love* this beast. But i have used
>> Windows for a long time before i switched to Gentoo. I just can't
>> live without a usable GUI anymore.
>
> I feel for you.  I've been there when I started my Lisp/Scheme
> journey. But once I got the hang of it, I never looked back :-)

Yeah - ya guys see everything after the punch cards as unneded eye candy
anyway :P

>> $ opam install merlin ocamlbuild ocp-indent
>> -> installed some stuff
>> $ apm install nuclide language-ocaml ocaml-indent build
>> -> "bash: apm: command not found"
>
> This, I'm certain, is an OS specific problem as on Ubuntu 14.04, here,
> it went all fine.  I'd suggest you try Atom installation again since
> the editor, IMO, seems to be worth it.

It surely is an OS-specific thing - because it is a build environment
thing. People tend to assume that everyone out there will have the same
OS they have and therefore do not even think about giving more detailed
instructions. That assumption is the most nasty FLOSS-world-specific
thing i experienced so far.
But i may try again as i get more experienced with the OCaml build
system. I think there may be some Atom dependencies missing on my system
because on Gentoo there is only installed what you explicitly installed.
The real pain always is finding out what is missing and how to get it...

> I, personally, wouldn't call it build env hell.  Since you're trying
> to swim in a different direction that the current's (vim & Emacs), you
> can't expect much material to be found.

Vim and Emacs are commandline editors - we got 2016 and IDEs for other
languages evolved to be GUI-driven out there.
If you want to know how an IDE looks like when it is done "right" - look
at Microsoft's Visual Studio. They do not often do things right but that
thing is the greatest IDE i've seen (and with todays CPUs and RAM it
even became fast *g*). Too bad they did their own .Net-based functional
language instead of adopting OCaml...

> I'd daresay OCaml is the best bet[2]; clean simple language with an
> ecosystem created by no "social coders" with (generally) no half-assed
> packages.

That is why i am here. Well, can't say a lot about the packages and do
not know what a social coder is (sounds like the opposite of antisocial)
- but type inference, functional paradigm, generic algebraic types, type
safety, memory safety and much better performance than Python is what i
want and OCaml seems to provide that.
Would also like dependent types and an all-inclusive standard library -
but you can't have it all i guess.
I mostly want to use OCaml for building libraries to be used from
Python. So in principle the lack of a feature-complete standard library
is not that much an issue for me.



-- 
Allan Wegan
<http://www.allanwegan.de/>
Jabber: allanwegan@ffnord.net
 OTR-Fingerprint: E4DCAA40 4859428E B3912896 F2498604 8CAA126F
Jabber: allanwegan@jabber.ccc.de
 OTR-Fingerprint: A1AAA1B9 C067F988 4A424D33 98343469 29164587
ICQ: 209459114
 OTR-Fingerprint: 71DE5B5E 67D6D758 A93BF1CE 7DA06625 205AC6EC


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]