I’ve been working with a Javascript (+ TypeScript) + Java + SQL stack for the last 10 years.

For 2024 I’d like to learn a new programming language, just for fun. I don’t have any particular goals in mind, I just want to learn something new. If I can use it later professionally that’d be cool, but if not that’s okay too.

Requirements:

  • Runs on linux
  • Not interested in languages created by Google or Apple
  • No “joke languages”, please

Thank you very much!

EDIT: I ended up ordering the paperback version of the Rust book. Maybe one day I’ll contribute to the Lemmy code base or something :P Thank you all for the replies!!!

  • xigoi
    2•10 months ago

    Re the sidebar: How are Nim and Roc partially concatenative?

    • @Andy@programming.dev
      1•10 months ago

      I may be expressing it poorly and inaccurately, but what I mean is that in Nim you can re-order arguments and functions to start with some data followed by a series of transformations. The following two lines are equivalent:

      parse_int(read_line(stdin))
stdin.read_line().parse_int()

      Roc offers a similar flow with their |> operator. Here’s a snippet from one of my Advent of Code 2022 solutions:

      partOne =
    "input.txt"
    |> getData
    |> Task.await \data ->
        data
        |> getRangePairs
        |> List.keepIf pairHasStrictSubset
        |> List.len
        |> Num.toStr
        |> Stdout.line
      • xigoi
        1•10 months ago

        That’s true, but if the transformations have more than one argument, they go after the name:

        data.split(",").join(";")

        as opposed to concatenative programming languages, where all arguments go before the name and there’s no visual indication of the structure:

        data "," split ";" join

        Also, there are more languages with this feature, for example D, VimScript or Koka.

        • @Andy@programming.dev
          2•10 months ago

          That’s true, but if the transformations have more than one argument, they go after the name

          Yup, I understand. That’s why I’ve not put them in the concatenative section.

          Also, there are more languages with this feature, for example D, VimScript or Koka.

          Thanks, maybe I’ll add them to the sidebar! I hadn’t heard of Koka.

          If you have a suggested heading/description to replace “partially concatenative” I’m interested. Function chaining? And I’m not sure but maybe execline is actually concatenative and needs to be moved out of that section.

          • xigoi
            1•10 months ago

            I think “uniform function call syntax” is the established term for this particular feature.

            • @Andy@programming.dev
              1•10 months ago

              Thanks. I know that’s the case for Nim’s flexibility, but I didn’t think it applied to the pipe operator stuff like in Roc. I’ll do some reading tonight to confirm.