Comment by scuff3d
2 days ago
I tried with Gleam, I really wanted to like it. I really like Louis Pilfold and I like his goals for the language. But something about it just didn't click for me. It's a good language, but at the end of the day I just didn't enjoy writing it.
It might be something the author talked about, but I think the language might be too small. It's one of the things I dislike about Rust too. I prefer a more batteries included approach because I can't stand having to pull in a bunch of small dependencies.
Rust is a HUGE language with a small stdlib. Gleam is a small language with a small stdlib.
Yes, thank you for pointing that out...
My point was about the need to rely on external libraries. I'm not a fan of that approach. I don't care for it in Rust or JavaScript, and I get a similar vibe from Gleam.
Agree. My dream:
Go stdlib and tooling
+
A good programming language
6 replies →
Im on the same boat and this is coming from someone who loves the beam thanks to elixir, I think the marketing of the lang threw me of a bit. But I might give it a try this week, as im feeling a bit burnt out with elixir
earlier this week I was thinking why aren't there more languages around the actor model and completely forgot gleam exists
Gleam is cool. I absolutely love that it's statically typed (dynamic typing is one of the things that pushes me away from Elixir), and the core of the language is very well designed. I just hate how small it is. I shouldn't need to bring in an external dependency for friggin file i/o.
And I know the common argument is that's it due to the fact you can target either the BEAM or a web browser, but those arguments don't fly. The default target is the BEAM, the standard library can support that and use external packages for the browser.