←back to thread

Why F#?

(batsov.com)
447 points bozhidar | 1 comments | 01 Apr 25 12:34 UTC | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
7thaccount ◴[01 Apr 25 13:05 UTC] No.43546330[source]▶
F# is beautiful, but I could never crack the nut and get fluent in it. I think the big problem is I only know a little C#, so it is difficult to figure out the object oriented methods that F# depends on. It was the same thing with Clojure and Scala for the JVM. I have zero interest in first learning C# or Java, just to use those platforms.
replies(2): >>43546337 #>>43546786 #
netdevphoenix ◴[01 Apr 25 13:06 UTC] No.43546337[source]▶
you are not supposed to do oop in f#
replies(6): >>43546372 #>>43546385 #>>43546428 #>>43546456 #>>43549887 #>>43549949 #
hajile ◴[01 Apr 25 13:14 UTC] No.43546428[source]▶
F# depends heavily on existing C# libraries and those are all OOP.
replies(1): >>43547879 #
1. smoothdeveloper ◴[01 Apr 25 15:21 UTC] No.43547879[source]▶
One way to look at it, but consuming OOP libraries doesn't turn code into OOP.

Also, FSharp.Core (which most F# code leans heavily on) is not OOP at all.

F# promotes object programming, doesn't proscribe mutability, encourages function and data approach.

It offers simple access to the different paradigms, with some opinionated choices (e.g. preventing leaning on OOP beyond an arbitrary stretch, like no "protected", only explicit interface implementation, etc.).