diffsitter VS unison

Or https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter. I've tried both and I like them. No preference or notable opinions on them yet!

For git diff's I've been using https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter

One more tree-sitter based diffing tool - diffsitter

https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter

Several threads here point to difftastic: https://github.com/Wilfred/difftastic

I know a lot of people who have a lot of hope for diffsitter (or something like it): https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter

Personally, I think the reason most "good" semantic diff tools are proprietary is that they are huge amounts of effort that are mostly "hacks" and "heuristics" bandaged together in ways that people don't want to let out how the sausage was made.

But I also "general, language agnostic AST-based semantic diff" is a mountain peak we cannot reach (probably ever), and I believe my experiments found an interesting local maxima that people are maybe sleeping on (lexer-based diffs rather than parser-based diffs): https://github.com/WorldMaker/tokdiff

https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter there are quiet a few projects such as this one, attempting to solve the issue. :)

There’s an interesting project in the semantic diff/merge space that I have been keeping an eye out for https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter

I have never used any of them, but it look like tree-sitter based diff tools are exactly what you are searching for (like difftastic, gumtree or diffsitter).

I believe Unison is the only attempt to do this at a programming language/environment level.

For Git diffs, there is Diffsitter, which uses Tree Sitter to generate semantic diffs of code files: https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter

I have not used it, but it is high on my todo list.

Looks great, I'll try it! FYI, there is a very similar project called diffsitter https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter

Short version: no type classes (yet)

Longer version:

Building upon what Quekid5 mentioned, Unison abilities are an implementation of what is referred to as algebraic effects in programming language literature. They represent capabilities like IO, state, exceptions, etc. They aren't really a replacement for type classes, though in some cases you can shoehorn abilities in where you might otherwise use a type class.

For someone coming from a Haskell background, I think that abilities are closer to a replacement for monad transformers. But in my opinion they are much more ergonomic.

Discusson of type classes comes up a lot. Here is a long-standing GitHub issue: https://github.com/unisonweb/unison/issues/502

For what it's worth, I've written Unison quite a lot over the past few years and while I've missed type classes at times, I think that reading unfamiliar code is easier without them. There's no implicit magic; you can see exactly what is being passed into a function. So far I've been happy with a bit more verbosity for the sake of readability.

I've been following the Unison lang [1] for quite some. Wing seem to set similar goals? From the first glance Wing looks more polished, but there's "The Big Idea" behind Unison - is there something similar?

[1]: https://github.com/unisonweb/unison

in haskell it looks like this, you specify the language extensions you want at the top of the source files: https://github.com/unisonweb/unison/blob/trunk/unison-core/src/Unison/ABT.hs

they adjusted my ticket to be a bug fix on their part.

I think Unison is going in this direction. Imo this is a mistake, as a program language functions not just as specification for the machine, but also as communication between programmers. Allowing the introduction of arbitrary dialects to suit individual preferences seems like it would interfere with that communication.