Have you used it, or heard of it? And if so, what do you think of it or it's future?
Some quick intro, in case you don't know about it: It's a fairly new programming language, released around 2014, and initially developed by an Argentinian tech company (still in active development by them, but now with contributors from outside). It's object oriented and compiled, with syntax heavily inspired by Ruby's. It\s statically typed although the compiler can infer types in many contexts so you don't have to write types all over the place (think Go, but more inference such as in method return values). The main intent of the language is to be pleasant to write but also very fast.
It's immature right now, and it's not even 1.0 yet. However, even though it's not labeled as production ready yet, multiple companies and individuals are using it for production with good results.
I really like the language and I (and many others in the community) think it has great potential. I'd highly recommend taking a look into it if you are interested in learning a new language.
>Some quick intro, in case you don't know about it What about its pro and cons in respect of some other modern programming languages? For what kind of applications is aimed for and what programming language wants to replace?
Robert King
Looks like a discount version of Python.
James Russell
It's pretty cozy. i use it for some projects on my LAN where i would have previously used ruby.
Justin Gonzalez
It's really good, it's just lacking support.
Pros: fast as fuck Cons: no one uses it
Jack Hill
Pros: It's ruby but compiled Cons: there are some differences between it and ruby obviously, and those differences are not super well documented.
Owen Cooper
Why do companies even make their own programming languages? I get it that Google and Apple does it, but unless you are that big what's the real benefit? It takes years before the language can truly be used in a safe production environment and there are already several other languages that does the job you need to do.
Kayden Richardson
It's mostly lowercase, no camelShitCase, a manageable amount of PascalCase. > object oriented Dropped. Sorry op, OOP is not acceptable in 2018.
Daniel Sanders
I love it and use it in company projects and for small tasks that are at hand in private. All the muh too dumb for oop autists can neck themselfes for all i care, its comfy as fuck
Jordan Adams
Ah, a programming language for the white man, finally.
Asher Williams
>Have you used it, or heard of it? Wrote a small hobby project in it. >And if so, what do you think of it or it's future? Provided they finish a good implementation: As a strategy to make Ruby fast it's a better alternative to JIT compilers and in many use cases than bindings. That being said, if you don't plan a Ruby migration or have a Ruby background it is only slightly more appealing than Java or C#. As example flow based type inference might seem cool at first, but like many implicit things gets annoying quick in non-trivial scenarios.
Connor Gonzalez
Also, their indentation convention is the same 2 shitty spaces of Ruby.
Carter Torres
I have been getting tried of pythons slow speed, so I looked at crystal and nim. Ended up choosing nim. Crystal looks meh.
Carter Torres
What is a motivation to even try it, what kind of features or experience could it deliver that is unseed in mature production-ready languages? Even if you want ruby-tier bs why not use nim? Even it looks more promising.
If you want dynamic type bs - JS or PHP is your friend, it is not that bad currently unlike the memes will tell you. Better than some obscure pre-beta trash.
I see no point using this garbage, not that I think it should be removed or abandoned, but atm it is pointless and a big waste of time
Jayden Jones
Isn't nim more of a cross between python and pascal? The only ruby related nim-thing i can come up with is the 2-space indentation.
Zachary Ortiz
pros: ruby but compiled cons: linux only (yes that's a con, can't deploy your programs on any other platform)
t. boomer
Chase Martinez
>Even it looks more promising. >still compiles to C and C++ pick one and only one
Ryan Perez
I'm sorry user but your post doesn't convey anything useful. Try reformulating your post if you have something to add to the discussion at hand.
Jaxson Rodriguez
sure thing Crystal uses an LLVM backend, which - while not perfect - is the right thing to do atm. Whereas Nim still compiles to C++, which is basically the hello world of compiler builders.
Cameron Davis
>whitespaced trash
Camden Lewis
>fast as C, Slick as Ruby >Crystal libraries are packed as Shards, and distributed via Git without needing a centralised repository.
>compiles to C++ Compiles to C which makes it far more portable as GCC supports more architectures and a C compiler is on most Unix machines.
Evan Reed
Stop the meme language bullshit and just write in Zig. Daily reminder that Zig is the white man's language, completely free of pajeets.
Jordan Adams
Crystal doesn't compete with Zig. It competes with C#, Kotlin, Java, Nim, Go, D (in GC mode), OCaml, Haskell and, to a lesser extent, Clojure, Ruby and Python.
Adam Wilson
An argie lang, after all
Liam Lewis
>Have you used it, or heard of it? I have used it. It's cool but I am not sure I like how the type system handles nil. >And if so, what do you think of it or it's future? With the right web framework and some adoption it just might be the next Ruby on Rails. It hope it gets lucky.
Having rewritten a small C# project in Crystal I think Crystal is significantly more compact and readable. Too bad the devs decided not to add namespaces (github.com/crystal-lang/crystal/issues/140). >many implicit things gets annoying quick in non-trivial scenarios Were they related to nil?
You can, but should you? For gamedev Crystal is like a slightly faster C# with poor Windows support. C# has a huge gamedev community. Crystal's community consists of backend devs jaded with Ruby and network service and misc infrastructural bullshit devs jaded with Go.
Oliver Price
Well nope. game development is the only thing I care about when I hear about a new language. If you put it that way then I'll ignore crystal
Luke Collins
dope, thanks
Logan Edwards
>syntax heavily inspired by Ruby's ewww
Angel Stewart
At least it looks better than Nim.
Justin Robinson
It’s not mandatory user. But that is the way it should be cuck.
Joshua Gomez
works fine for me on macOS
Logan Martin
This looks like every "modern" programming language. Like, if you want pre-release, "fast", yet abstract languages, what makes this better than nim? Or even Rust? Or if you want something that's fast, but still easy to use, Go?
Liam Nelson
>It takes years before the language can truly be used in a safe production environment I made one like lua and deployed it in a few months, it's definitely better for my use case than the alternatives
Eli Reed
maybe you want one that doesnt have awful C syntax
Blake Long
>awful >C syntax
Choose one.
Blake Hall
they should make a country like Israel for everyone who thinks C syntax is good and deport them all there
Brody Garcia
I always loved Ruby. Does Crystal's object model roughly work the same way?
Jackson Roberts
C++ is patrician choice, you don't need anything else.
Samuel Perry
>what makes this better than nim? a more coherent design >Or even Rust? speed of development. >Or if you want something that's fast, but still easy to use, Go? generics, an advanced type system, oo (might be a downside)
Ian Wood
yes. it even has method_missing despite being compiled and statically typed.
