Listen I absolutely love rust but it’s not even close. Typescript’s type system is orders of magnitude more powerful, to the point where it is actually turing complete.
That’s not realistic or “fair” - most Haskell projects will use a dozen or so extensions easily. GHC has been a platform for language experimentation for a long time; standardisation efforts keep on cropping up in annual surveys. (Eg, swapping in Text for String in base is long overdue, but it’s a hold over from days where FP pedagogy was seen as more important.)
I code a ton in both Rust and Typescript for work… I think Rust has just as capable of a type system, but leveraging macros for functional defs vs object ones.
Count us rust folks in. Typescript may doing it’s best, but it’s not as great
Listen I absolutely love rust but it’s not even close. Typescript’s type system is orders of magnitude more powerful, to the point where it is actually turing complete.
deleted by creator
GHC has had experimental support for linear types in Haskell since version 9.0.1
deleted by creator
That’s not realistic or “fair” - most Haskell projects will use a dozen or so extensions easily. GHC has been a platform for language experimentation for a long time; standardisation efforts keep on cropping up in annual surveys. (Eg, swapping in Text for String in base is long overdue, but it’s a hold over from days where FP pedagogy was seen as more important.)
Typescript’s string pattern types are quite neat though
deleted by creator
I code a ton in both Rust and Typescript for work… I think Rust has just as capable of a type system, but leveraging macros for functional defs vs object ones.