> Experimenting lately with OCaml, feels like Haskell's tooling is more mature.
I feel like OCaml has been on a fast upward trajectory the past couple of years. Both in terms of language features and tooling. I expect the developer experience to surpass Haskell if it hasn't already.
I really like Merlin/ocaml-lsp. Sure, it doesn't have every LSP feature like a tool with a lot of eyes on it, such as clangd, but it handles nearly everything.
And yeah, dune is a little odd, but I haven't had any issues with it in a while. I even have some curve-ball projects that involve a fair amount of C/FFI work.
My only complaint with opam is how switches feel a little clunky. But still, I'll take it over pip, npm, all day.
I've been using OCaml for years now and compared to most other languages, the experience has been pretty pleasant.
My little experiments with OCaml have been pleasant thus far (in terms of language ergonomics), but on the tooling side Haskell (or rather I should say GHC) is pretty sweet.
For what I had to do thus far, at one point I needed to step debug through my code. Whereas in GHC land I reload my project in the interpreter (GHCi or cabal repl), set a break point on function name and step through the execution. With OCaml I have to go through the separate bytecode compiler to build it with debug symbols and the I can navigate through program execution. The nice thing is that I can easily go back in execution in flow ("timetravel debugging"), but a less ergonomic. Also less experienced with this flow, to consider my issues authoritative.
I don't have that much experience with dune (aside from setting up a project and running dune build), but one thing that confused me at first, is that the libraries I have to add to the configuration do not necessarily match the Opam package names.
The LSP is fast, as mentioned before, it supports goto definition, but once I jump to a definition to one of my dependencies I get a bunch of squiggly lines in those files (probably can't see transitive dependency symbols, if I where to guess). I can navigate dependencies one level deeper than I can with the Haskell language server, though.
I actually want to better understand how to build my projects without Dune, and probably will attempt to do so in the future. The same way I know how to manage a Haskell project without Cabal. Feels like it gives me a better understanding of the ecosystem.
I feel like OCaml has been on a fast upward trajectory the past couple of years. Both in terms of language features and tooling. I expect the developer experience to surpass Haskell if it hasn't already.
I really like Merlin/ocaml-lsp. Sure, it doesn't have every LSP feature like a tool with a lot of eyes on it, such as clangd, but it handles nearly everything.
And yeah, dune is a little odd, but I haven't had any issues with it in a while. I even have some curve-ball projects that involve a fair amount of C/FFI work.
My only complaint with opam is how switches feel a little clunky. But still, I'll take it over pip, npm, all day.
I've been using OCaml for years now and compared to most other languages, the experience has been pretty pleasant.