Replies: 3 comments 5 replies
-
What do you mean by "more powerful" ? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I've read about Haxe in 2000s, before I started my work on Fusion. They have different design goals: in Haxe you create whole apps, in Fusion you create components to be used from other languages. Haxe has syntax similar to the (now dead) ActionScript, Fusion is similar to C#. Fusion transpiles to C, D, Swift, TypeScript, OpenCL and Haxe does not. There's a request to compare the two languages: #94 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I think this is an important conversation. Haxe has a lot of capabilities in it's standard lib, stuff like json/xml parsing, HTTP client, starting processes, etc. As you mentioned, it doesn't really produce a "lib" to be used from other languages, it's design goal is to produce a whole compiled application. For those of us looking to create re-usable libraries targeting multiple languages, HAXE is not suitable, and Fusion is designed for this purpose, but it's missing a lot of crucial std features which makes writing a library of any significance nearly impossible. Without process/start capabilities, I can't even offload the heavy lifting to another process and just provide a Fusion wrapper. It would be great if we could find a way to leverage HAXE's std lib in some useful way to expand the capabilities of Fusion |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Haxe is more powerful than Fusion, and I think it's nothing wrong to leverage its abilities.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions