F# doesnt work ootb with sdk preview2. Work ok with preview1 of SDK (win/ubuntu/osx/docker), but preview2 has a bug, the fix is in progress ( ref https://github.com/dotnet/netcorecli-fsc/issues/12 ) and will be published a nuget package with fix soon.
You reported the issue 11 days ago. I'm surprised they just announced it with such a basic use case being broken. It doesn't bode well for F# as a first class citizen in their ecosystem.
F# is not a first class citizen. They pay it lip service because it's a far more advanced language and makes MS look like they're on the cutting edge. Plus the team that made it is responsible for dragging the CLR into the modern era (or into the 60s) by bringing generics. And showing off important features on .NET such as quoted code, async workflows, F# interactive. But a simple look at tooling and language announcements shows that the F# team is very underfunded.
> The results of the 2016 Stack Overflow Developer Survey are in! F# came out as the single most highly paid tech worldwide and is amongst the third top paying techs in the US
Yes and it's clear from what the F# team has said that the hope they have for the future of the language is that the community will invest.
That's fine, but let's not think that this will produce tooling anywhere nearly as refined as C#'s stuff. Take F# interactive v the C# one. F# has like a decade lead. Yet the C# interactive editor is smooth, polished, even has VS project integration, something the F# team had thought of doing many years ago.
Non F#-team members[1] have said that internal politics are the issue here. To the point where some books were ... edited ... to paint C# in a better light, relatively. MS's marketing reflects this. My guess is they're too proud to admit their flagship language from their high-profile hire was shown up by what was a research project. And that the CLR's arguably biggest tech advantage over the JVM (generics) was also only done through the intense efforts of MSR; that MS Corp was against it.
It's sad, because MS is in a position to really elevate the world's programming consciousness/ability by really promoting F#, yet it's still a novelty for, as MS has said "scientific and engineering" applications. Yet, apart from tooling/legacy, F# handles every case C# does in a better way. At worst, it's C# with lighter syntax.
Oh well. At least it's there, works, and has some level of support. Only reason I consider using .NET these days.
1: The F# folks are amazingly polite and I've never heard them even hint at a complaint about MS.
The finance industry where F# shines is willing to invest, I suppose. OCaml e.g. is backed by Jane Street and F# is even simpler in that regard because the hardest part is efficient runtime which is for F# is .NET - already done well by MS. But what some corp willing to invest in tooling for F# could do while MSVS is closed source and is not most transparent IDE in the world to say the least wrt plugins.
> too proud to admit their flagship language from their high-profile hire
That's acute while we know that high-profile hire's past victories (Turbo Pascal, Object Pascal, Delphi) were never about the language, but about incredibly polished IDE, compiler, libraries and runtime.
> yet it's still a novelty for, as MS has said "scientific and engineering" applications
MS marketing wisdom is overrated, to say the very least. Look at Tablet PC. Windows XP Tablet PC Edition released in 2001. Ink APIs are all way through Windows SDK since back then. And they never realized that stylus thing is something more than just a 'uhm, you can draw a kitten, maybe?'. At least they never articulate anything more than that in any promotion campaign. And now Apple released iPad Pro and will eat the TabletPC-Covertable-Surface market.
Bug was found too late, near code freeze for rtm, not enough time for fix.
fix is in progress ( https://github.com/Microsoft/visualfsharp/pull/1290 ) probably tomorrow, it's not a big problem one or two days of delay. Also because that's an sdk issue (preview2) not of .NET Core (rtm)
The f# support is in beta, c# was ahead obv, but that's ok i think, it's used as the language for the corefx, etc. vb is not working at all atm.
What i really like it's how the sdk it's evolving, using modularized components it's possibile to fix/improve/evolve the f# compiler/library, without waiting a new version of sdk. That's really good.
In the next sdk or rtm also the `dotnet new` it's going to be updatable, so np about template too
Seconded. I saw the announcement and immediately went to grab the docker image and give it a shot with F# via "dotnet new -l F#" and go. It restored and built, but didn't run. So v1.0 is broken, I guess?
Still a little odd for a release announcement. It feels disingenuous to only afterwards make the fine-grained distinction that yes the libraries are technically v1, but the tooling is still in preview.
Kinda like announcing your new line of cars is ready for purchase today! Except that down in the fine print you might find out that the engine is ready to go, but the steering wheel, headlights, dashboard, and pedals are all still in development and so it's justifiable that they're broken.
Was like that also in the previous release.
The .net core was rc2 and the .net core sdk was preview1.
I use it, and i think it's ok.
The sdk it's just a build system. the real value is the .NET Core, that mean the coreclr (the virtual machine) and the foundation libraries (corefx).
I can change the build system one month from now, to build a project using the old packages.
It's not a car (engine vs wheel).
It's more like food vs marketplace. the food it's the real deal, the markeplace may be incomplete (no parking).
