doc VS Fable: F# |> BABEL

* list of list literals (1,2; 3,4) eqv ((1,2), (3,4));

to paraphrase Larry Walk “everyone wants the [semi] colon”

https://docs.raku.org/

amen to this … i recommend thinking about your problem in terms of effective data structures and then apply even a very simple DSL to handle access and transformations … fwiw the built in Grammars and Slang support in raku https://docs.raku.org are fantastic tools for this job.

When I was looking at the language, I didn't find the documentation "really poor". In fact I was impressed at how much of a one-stop-shop the official docs site was for both conceptual docs and API docs.

https://docs.raku.org/

The Raku Programming Language documentation already contains most (if not all) the documentation you need to deal with the issues you will confront in migrating Perl code to Raku. But, as documentation goes, the focus is on the factual differences. These blogs will try to go a little more in-depth about specific issues and provide a little more hands-on information based on my experience porting quite a lot of Perl code to Raku.

I will start working on the new version of Pod as a branch in https://github.com/raku/doc.

Well, performance has been improved by several orders of magnitude since the first release. So maybe it's time to look at https://raku.org again (or first have a look at its new documentation site https://docs.raku.org)

go to https://docs.raku.org/ and type "IO" into the search field. Behold the list that appears. Check out IO::Path or IO::Handle or whatever looks interesting. Maybe it's just me but I go "Ooh, look at all the things!".

Related: The Raku documentation does an excellent job explaining hashes/dictrionaries/associative arrays. If you've any issues, please submit a Github issue.

Raku has a lot of syntax. My first attempt at learning the language failed because I couldn't get past all the strange syntax I saw at https://docs.raku.org/. Sometimes I didn't know what the syntax was called, so I didn't know what to search for.

In the course of figuring this out, I realized that our docs also (slightly) misstate what \d means in a Regex, which led to this PR. So thanks for bringing all this up!

This conversation could be referring to https://fable.io/

Other than that, the question is indeed strange and I agree with your statements.

NOTE: For larger codebases with more history it is likely that the Program.fs file will have a lot of orchestration and logic as well. given that it is often where everything clashes and starts, for example the Fable Entrypoint is in Entry.fs and it contains a lot of code. The best you can do always is to start at the bottom of the file and work your way up. Remember: Everything at the bottom uses what has already been defined at the top so there are no circular dependencies or random functions/types at the bottom that can trip you off, everything comes from the top!

I am a big fan of going with web components + plain (build-less) javascript whenever possible, so it is not surprising that I often favor things like the Fable Compiler, where I can target my F# code directly to javascript and be as close to the native JS experience as possible, both for interop concerns and for ecosystem integration.

Fable compiler - https://fable.io/

The F# community is very friendly (these sub-communities as well), and they have plenty of good issues/opportunities to contribute OSS work to across any skill level.

Phosphor isn't hiring right now, but we expect to begin a search for FE/interface engineers over the next few month. Email [email protected] for anyone interested.

Naturally I’d recommend using a better language such as ReScript or Elm or PureScript or F#‘s Fable + Elmish, but “React” is the king right now and people perceive TypeScript as “less risky” for jobs/hiring, so here we are.

Stuff like this: https://github.com/fable-compiler/Fable/issues/1822

It just seems like an incredibly ambitious project that appears to have very little equal but is mainly worked on by a handful of people but no corporate backing. I get the feeling that if you want to use it, you'll either be the only one doing what you're doing or among just a few people. I already use F# and feel this way about the core language itself.

F# is also part of the OCaml family, has a great to-JS transpiler (https://fable.io/) and F# code can also be used in .NET projects.

I have heard many good things about https://fable.io/ Fable converts F# code to JavaScript. There are currently 407 packages available for interacting with existing JavaScript packages and frameworks.