Round 1, Match 12 of the 2nd Programming Language World Championships!

· · Web · 6 · 7 · 1

(2nd Programming Language (World Championships)) or

(2nd (Programming Language World Championships))


@fribbledom What are you trying to gauge, anyway? Quality? Usefulness? Popularity?

@tewha @fribbledom Since C++ beat Objective-C 80/20, it's clearly "perversity".

@mdhughes @fribbledom I read that as “pervasity” at first, which isn’t even a word. Perversity makes more sense.

@amiloradovsky @fribbledom That’s what I thought but at one point Ocaml or whatever was beating JavaScript 4:1.

@tewha @fribbledom Browsing the hashtag, I'm unsurprised about where it converges.


I'm neither trying to gauge, nor trying to read anything into these results, really. It's just a fun game. Seeing how many people participate even for the polls with the most obscure languages, it'll probably end up being a popularity contest, but that's fine.

@fribbledom It is a cool way to find out about languages I’ve never heard of before, like OCaml. Whatever it is, it clearly has an organized fanbase. :-)


Even though I assume most people are just trying to stick it to JavaScript, I'm not even surprised it's doing that good. Definitely worth checking OCaml out!

@fribbledom Can you see votes over time? Because I swear it was absolutely burying JavaScript at one point. Might’ve hit an anti-JavaScript group, though. :-)

For what it’s worth, I program AWS Lambda in JavaScript. It’s not nearly as bad as everyone says if you code carefully instead of cleverly.


I did google OCaml and it looked weird. But still better than js.

I haven't heared of Ocaml befote, but i don't like javascripts. So o huess ocaml is spmething to reserch then.

@fribbledom used ocaml a little in uni and mostly liked it but the type-strict operators was kind of annoying. my brain deflated a little the moment the prof told us that you use + for integers and +. for floats.

but you know what I still liked that better than the == vs === in javascript.

@crlf @fribbledom It's because you can't introduce the polymorphic operators without wrecking the whole language for it: either with type-classes, or SML-style exceptional status of the operators.
Although it indeed is kind of annoying, I'd argue it's a small price to pay for the elegance and simplicity, and most importantly safety from all sorts of errors due to the implicit conversion between numeric types you didn't mean…

@amiloradovsky @fribbledom I'll also admit to not knowing much else about the ocaml type system. it was a language theory course and it only taught enough of the language for us to get done what we had to. a few years later I would learn a bit of haskell and enjoy the polymorphic numbers but also really hate them (especially Int vs Integer, ugh). so looking back I can kind of appreciate it. maybe I should learn more ocaml for real.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!