this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
71 points (92.8% liked)

Programming

17133 readers
402 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bradboimler@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago
[–] yogsototh@programming.dev 0 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

purescript if you count “compile to js” as compiled.

Otherwise Haskell

[–] cafuneandchill@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

After months of no practice, I forget quite a lot of stuff about them, regardless of language; therefore, none

EDIT: None of them is memory safe, that is

[–] xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 13 hours ago
[–] undefined@links.hackliberty.org 7 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (2 children)

Crystal, but only because I’m a full time Ruby on Rails (and sometimes Hanami!) programmer.

It’s fantastic, and I had an excuse to use it at work when we needed to gather PHP Watchdog logs from a MySQL database and format, output them to STDOUT in a Kubernetes environment. (This was necessary for our log monitoring tools expecting data in a standard way, AKA not connecting to a database. 🤦‍♂️)

I know there are perhaps better options out there (Go, Rust, etc.) but from a Rubyist’s point of view Crystal gives you that “flow” from working in a beautiful language but with the performance boost of compiled software.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bonus_crab@lemmy.world 23 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

C# is good too. If you havent heard of lobster you should look into it.

[–] warlaan@feddit.org 1 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

C# isn't exactly compiled, at least not into machine language. It is transpiled into byte code that is run on a virtual machine that on turn is an interpreter/JIT-compiler.

Depending on why someone is asking for a compiled language that may or may not be a problem, because to the one writing the code it looks like a compiled language, but to the one running it it looks like an interpreted one.

[–] Undertaker@feddit.org 1 points 13 hours ago

It is compiled into bytecode. A transpiler translates to another programming language with the same level of abstraction. A compiler translates into a level that is nearer to or machine code.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cinnamon_tea@programming.dev 5 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

You forgot that beauty - "undefined behavior"!

Memory-safety can guarantee only so much safety! C++ can still blow up in your face, even with all the alleged memory-safety built into C++, thanks to all the UB traps in C and C++.

Rust is the closest language that has no such "gotchas".

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 31 points 20 hours ago (9 children)

With no context, this could be an honest attempt to learn about different tools, a thinly veiled set-up to promote a specific language, or an attempt to stir up drama. I can't tell which.

It's curious how such specific conditions are embedded into the question with no explanation of why, yet "memory safe" is included among them without specifying what kind of memory safety.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] 30p87@feddit.org 1 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

C++, with some Skill

/s

but seriously, I don't know any language with a good, C/Cpp-like Syntax (so not Rust), with a good compiler (again not Rust). So I'm sticking to Cpp.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 46 points 22 hours ago
<?php
declare(strict_types=1)

😏 😁

🏃‍♂️💨

[–] pelya@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

C++ with -Wall -Werror, and no pointer diddling.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 13 points 13 hours ago

Its definitely best to try and avoid raw pointers, but even if you try really hard I found it's not really possible to get a Rust-like experience with no UB.

Even something as simple as std::optional - you can easily forget to check it has a value and then boom, UB.

The C++ committee still have the attitude that programmers are capable of avoiding UB if they simply document it, and therefore they can omit all sanity checks. std::optional could easily have thrown an exception rather than UB but they think programmers are perfect and will never make that mistake. There are similar wild decisions with more recent features like coroutines.

They somehow haven't even learnt the very old lesson "safe by default".

If I wanted memory unsafety I think I would consider Zig instead of C++ at this point.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 32 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Rust for now, by a wide margin. But I'm following other languages that I think have the potential to surpass it, including Vale (promises way more than it delivers currently), Koka, Hylo, maybe Lobster.

[–] tooLikeTheNope@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (2 children)
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Honest question, what would make you pick Gleam over Elixir? Both seem to have significant overlap

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 points 3 hours ago

Isn't Elixer dynamically typed?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] demesisx@infosec.pub 15 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (2 children)

As others have said, Haskell and Rust are pretty great. A language that hasn’t been mentioned that I REALLY want to catch on, though, is Unison.

Honorable mention to my main driver lately: Purescript

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] apoisel@discuss.tchncs.de 18 points 21 hours ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] UFODivebomb@programming.dev 8 points 19 hours ago

Scala 3 native. If the compiler was faster I'd be even happier. Curious to try Ada

[–] lambdabeta@lemmy.ca 17 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Ada, hands down. Every time I go to learn Rust I'm disappointed by the lack of safety. I get that it's miles ahead of C++, but that's not much. I get that it strikes a much better balance than Ada (it's not too hard to get it to compile) but it still leaves a lot to be desired in terms of safe interfacing. Plus it's memory model is more complicated than it needs to be (though Ada's secondary stack takes some getting used to).

I wonder if any other Ada devs have experience with rust and can make a better comparison?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 7 points 20 hours ago

Rust and Haskell (I think Haskell counts)

[–] Andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 21 hours ago

Hands down, Rust 🦀

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 8 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Python with MyPy.

(Almost any language can meet those criteria, with enough shenanigans.)

[–] arthur@lemmy.zip 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

But that's not compiled, not to binary at least.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frankenswine@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago

You mean... except Ada?

[–] flubba86@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works -4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Traister101@lemmy.today 8 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

They specified statically typed languages. Python would be dynamically typed

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] zcd@lemmy.ca 44 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Dhs92@programming.dev 31 points 19 hours ago
[–] germanatlas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

That is a very specific subset

[–] sus@programming.dev 26 points 21 hours ago

Garbage collection is still allowed, and technically JIT languages are still compiled so it really isn't that restrictive

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›