Alternatives to ReasonML logo

Alternatives to ReasonML

OCaml, Haskell, Flow, ClojureScript, and Elm are the most popular alternatives and competitors to ReasonML.
68
79
+ 1
9

What is ReasonML and what are its top alternatives?

It lets you write simple, fast and quality type safe code while leveraging both the JavaScript & OCaml ecosystems.It is powerful, safe type inference means you rarely have to annotate types, but everything gets checked for you.
ReasonML is a tool in the Languages category of a tech stack.
ReasonML is an open source tool with GitHub stars and GitHub forks. Here’s a link to ReasonML's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to ReasonML

  • OCaml
    OCaml

    It is an industrial strength programming language supporting functional, imperative and object-oriented styles. It is the technology of choice in companies where a single mistake can cost millions and speed matters, ...

  • Haskell
    Haskell

    It is a general purpose language that can be used in any domain and use case, it is ideally suited for proprietary business logic and data analysis, fast prototyping and enhancing existing software environments with correct code, performance and scalability. ...

  • Flow
    Flow

    Flow is an online collaboration platform that makes it easy for people to create, organize, discuss, and accomplish tasks with anyone, anytime, anywhere. By merging a sleek, intuitive interface with powerful functionality, we're out to revolutionize the way the world's productive teams get things done. ...

  • ClojureScript
    ClojureScript

    ClojureScript is a compiler for Clojure that targets JavaScript. It is designed to emit JavaScript code which is compatible with the advanced compilation mode of the Google Closure optimizing compiler. ...

  • Elm
    Elm

    Writing HTML apps is super easy with elm-lang/html. Not only does it render extremely fast, it also quietly guides you towards well-architected code. ...

  • PureScript
    PureScript

    A small strongly typed programming language with expressive types that compiles to JavaScript, written in and inspired by Haskell. ...

  • TypeScript
    TypeScript

    TypeScript is a language for application-scale JavaScript development. It's a typed superset of JavaScript that compiles to plain JavaScript. ...

  • React
    React

    Lots of people use React as the V in MVC. Since React makes no assumptions about the rest of your technology stack, it's easy to try it out on a small feature in an existing project. ...

ReasonML alternatives & related posts

OCaml logo

OCaml

159
126
21
A general purpose industrial-strength programming language
159
126
+ 1
21
PROS OF OCAML
  • 5
    Satisfying to write
  • 4
    Pattern matching
  • 3
    Also has OOP
  • 3
    Easy syntax
  • 3
    Very practical
  • 3
    Extremely powerful type inference
CONS OF OCAML
  • 3
    Small community
  • 1
    Royal pain in the neck to compile large programs

related OCaml posts

Haskell logo

Haskell

1.1K
1.1K
495
An advanced purely-functional programming language
1.1K
1.1K
+ 1
495
PROS OF HASKELL
  • 86
    Purely-functional programming
  • 65
    Statically typed
  • 58
    Type-safe
  • 38
    Great community
  • 38
    Open source
  • 29
    Composable
  • 29
    Built-in concurrency
  • 28
    Built-in parallelism
  • 22
    Referentially transparent
  • 19
    Generics
  • 14
    Intellectual satisfaction
  • 13
    Type inference
  • 11
    If it compiles, it's correct
  • 7
    Flexible
  • 7
    Monads
  • 4
    Great type system
  • 4
    Proposition testing with QuickCheck
  • 3
    One of the most powerful languages *(see blub paradox)*
  • 2
    Great maintainability of the code
  • 2
    Fun
  • 2
    Purely-functional Programming
  • 2
    Kind system
  • 2
    Reliable
  • 2
    Highly expressive, type-safe, fast development time
  • 2
    Type classes
  • 2
    Better type-safe than sorry
  • 2
    Pattern matching and completeness checking
  • 2
    Best in class thinking tool
  • 0
    Orthogonality
  • 0
    Predictable
CONS OF HASKELL
  • 7
    Too much distraction in language extensions
  • 7
    Error messages can be very confusing
  • 4
    Libraries have poor documentation
  • 3
    No best practices
  • 3
    No good ABI
  • 2
    Sometimes performance is unpredictable
  • 2
    Poor packaging for apps written in it for Linux distros
  • 1
    Slow compilation

related Haskell posts

Vadim Bakaev
Shared insights
on
HaskellHaskellScalaScala

Why I am using Haskell in my free time?

I have 3 reasons for it. I am looking for:

Fun.

Improve functional programming skill.

Improve problem-solving skill.

Laziness and mathematical abstractions behind Haskell makes it a wonderful language.

It is Pure functional, it helps me to write better Scala code.

Highly expressive language gives elegant ways to solve coding puzzle.

See more
Flow logo

Flow

43
56
15
Simple project and task management for busy teams
43
56
+ 1
15
PROS OF FLOW
  • 6
    Great for collaboration
  • 6
    Easy to use
  • 3
    Free
CONS OF FLOW
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Flow posts

    ClojureScript logo

    ClojureScript

    283
    256
    2
    A Clojure compiler targeting JavaScript
    283
    256
    + 1
    2
    PROS OF CLOJURESCRIPT
    • 2
      Functional and stable
    CONS OF CLOJURESCRIPT
      Be the first to leave a con

      related ClojureScript posts

      I adopted Clojure and ClojureScript because:

      • it's 1 language, multiple platforms.
      • Simple syntax.
      • Designed to avoid unwanted side effects and bugs.
      • Immutable data-structures.
      • Compact code, very expressive.
      • Source code is data.
      • It has super-flexible macro.
      • Has metadata.
      • Interoperability with JavaScript, Java and C#.
      See more
      Elm logo

      Elm

      619
      685
      301
      A type inferred, functional reactive language that compiles to HTML, CSS, and JavaScript
      619
      685
      + 1
      301
      PROS OF ELM
      • 43
        Code stays clean
      • 41
        Great type system
      • 39
        No Runtime Exceptions
      • 32
        Fun
      • 27
        Easy to understand
      • 21
        Correctness
      • 21
        Type safety
      • 15
        JS fatigue
      • 11
        Declarative
      • 11
        Ecosystem agrees on one Application Architecture
      • 9
        Friendly compiler messages
      • 7
        Fast rendering
      • 7
        Welcoming community
      • 6
        If it compiles, it runs
      • 5
        Stable ecosystem
      • 4
        'Batteries included'
      • 2
        Package.elm-lang.org
      CONS OF ELM
      • 2
        No typeclasses -> repitition (i.e. map has 130versions)
      • 2
        JS interoperability a bit more involved
      • 1
        Backwards compability breaks between releases
      • 1
        More code is required
      • 1
        Main developer enforces "the correct" style hard
      • 1
        JS interop can not be async
      • 1
        No communication with users

      related Elm posts

      Shared insights
      on
      ReactReactReduxReduxElmElm

      React is awesome, but is just a view library, when we need to manage state, there is Redux.js. The ecosystem of redux is big, complex and hard to integrate. That's why we choose to create hydux. Hydux is simple, the main idea is from Elm, a pure functional vdom-based framework for front-end. We seperate the whole app with state, actions and views. Which means not only our views are a tree, but also our state and actions. Reuse state and actions are just like reuse react components, no need to consider dependences.

      See more
      PureScript logo

      PureScript

      59
      69
      6
      A strongly-typed language that compiles to Javascript
      59
      69
      + 1
      6
      PROS OF PURESCRIPT
      • 4
        Purely functional
      • 2
        Great FFI to JavaScript
      • 0
        More Haskell-ish than Haskell
      CONS OF PURESCRIPT
      • 1
        Have Some Bugs

      related PureScript posts

      TypeScript logo

      TypeScript

      63.4K
      49.1K
      463
      A superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output
      63.4K
      49.1K
      + 1
      463
      PROS OF TYPESCRIPT
      • 163
        More intuitive and type safe javascript
      • 97
        Type safe
      • 73
        JavaScript superset
      • 46
        The best AltJS ever
      • 27
        Best AltJS for BackEnd
      • 14
        Powerful type system, including generics & JS features
      • 10
        Nice and seamless hybrid of static and dynamic typing
      • 9
        Aligned with ES development for compatibility
      • 9
        Compile time errors
      • 6
        Structural, rather than nominal, subtyping
      • 5
        Angular
      • 3
        Starts and ends with JavaScript
      • 1
        Garbage collection
      CONS OF TYPESCRIPT
      • 4
        Code may look heavy and confusing
      • 3
        Hype

      related TypeScript posts

      Yshay Yaacobi

      Our first experience with .NET core was when we developed our OSS feature management platform - Tweek (https://github.com/soluto/tweek). We wanted to create a solution that is able to run anywhere (super important for OSS), has excellent performance characteristics and can fit in a multi-container architecture. We decided to implement our rule engine processor in F# , our main service was implemented in C# and other components were built using JavaScript / TypeScript and Go.

      Visual Studio Code worked really well for us as well, it worked well with all our polyglot services and the .Net core integration had great cross-platform developer experience (to be fair, F# was a bit trickier) - actually, each of our team members used a different OS (Ubuntu, macos, windows). Our production deployment ran for a time on Docker Swarm until we've decided to adopt Kubernetes with almost seamless migration process.

      After our positive experience of running .Net core workloads in containers and developing Tweek's .Net services on non-windows machines, C# had gained back some of its popularity (originally lost to Node.js), and other teams have been using it for developing microservices, k8s sidecars (like https://github.com/Soluto/airbag), cli tools, serverless functions and other projects...

      See more
      Adebayo Akinlaja
      Engineering Manager at Andela · | 27 upvotes · 1.1M views

      I picked up an idea to develop and it was no brainer I had to go with React for the frontend. I was faced with challenges when it came to what component framework to use. I had worked extensively with Material-UI but I needed something different that would offer me wider range of well customized components (I became pretty slow at styling). I brought in Evergreen after several sampling and reads online but again, after several prototype development against Evergreen—since I was using TypeScript and I had to import custom Type, it felt exhaustive. After I validated Evergreen with the designs of the idea I was developing, I also noticed I might have to do a lot of styling. I later stumbled on Material Kit, the one specifically made for React . It was promising with beautifully crafted components, most of which fits into the designs pages I had on ground.

      A major problem of Material Kit for me is it isn't written in TypeScript and there isn't any plans to support its TypeScript version. I rolled up my sleeve and started converting their components to TypeScript and if you'll ask me, I am still on it.

      In summary, I used the Create React App with TypeScript support and I am spending some time converting Material Kit to TypeScript before I start developing against it. All of these components are going to be hosted on Bit.

      If you feel I am crazy or I have gotten something wrong, I'll be willing to listen to your opinion. Also, if you want to have a share of whatever TypeScript version of Material Kit I end up coming up with, let me know.

      See more
      React logo

      React

      128.4K
      104.7K
      3.8K
      A JavaScript library for building user interfaces
      128.4K
      104.7K
      + 1
      3.8K
      PROS OF REACT
      • 774
        Components
      • 657
        Virtual dom
      • 567
        Performance
      • 491
        Simplicity
      • 438
        Composable
      • 176
        Data flow
      • 162
        Declarative
      • 124
        Isn't an mvc framework
      • 114
        Reactive updates
      • 111
        Explicit app state
      • 39
        JSX
      • 23
        Learn once, write everywhere
      • 19
        Uni-directional data flow
      • 17
        Easy to Use
      • 14
        Works great with Flux Architecture
      • 10
        Great perfomance
      • 8
        Built by Facebook
      • 7
        Javascript
      • 5
        Speed
      • 5
        TypeScript support
      • 4
        Feels like the 90s
      • 4
        Hooks
      • 4
        Awesome
      • 4
        Scalable
      • 4
        Easy to start
      • 3
        Server Side Rendering
      • 3
        Fancy third party tools
      • 3
        Props
      • 3
        Obama
      • 3
        Server side views
      • 3
        Functional
      • 3
        Scales super well
      • 3
        Excellent Documentation
      • 3
        Cross-platform
      • 2
        Rich ecosystem
      • 2
        Start simple
      • 2
        Allows creating single page applications
      • 2
        Sdfsdfsdf
      • 2
        Beautiful and Neat Component Management
      • 2
        Very gentle learning curve
      • 2
        Has functional components
      • 2
        Simple
      • 2
        Closer to standard JavaScript and HTML than others
      • 2
        Super easy
      • 2
        Has arrow functions
      • 2
        Strong Community
      • 2
        Great migration pathway for older systems
      • 2
        SSR
      • 2
        Fast evolving
      • 2
        Simple, easy to reason about and makes you productive
      • 2
        Just the View of MVC
      • 1
        Sharable
      • 1
        Every decision architecture wise makes sense
      • 1
        Permissively-licensed
      • 1
        Split your UI into components with one true state
      • 1
        Fragments
      • 0
        Recharts
      CONS OF REACT
      • 36
        Requires discipline to keep architecture organized
      • 23
        No predefined way to structure your app
      • 22
        Need to be familiar with lots of third party packages
      • 9
        JSX
      • 7
        Not enterprise friendly
      • 5
        One-way binding only
      • 2
        State consistency with backend neglected
      • 2
        Bad Documentation
      • 1
        Paradigms change too fast

      related React posts

      Vaibhav Taunk
      Team Lead at Technovert · | 31 upvotes · 1.9M views

      I am starting to become a full-stack developer, by choosing and learning .NET Core for API Development, Angular CLI / React for UI Development, MongoDB for database, as it a NoSQL DB and Flutter / React Native for Mobile App Development. Using Postman, Markdown and Visual Studio Code for development.

      See more
      Adebayo Akinlaja
      Engineering Manager at Andela · | 27 upvotes · 1.1M views

      I picked up an idea to develop and it was no brainer I had to go with React for the frontend. I was faced with challenges when it came to what component framework to use. I had worked extensively with Material-UI but I needed something different that would offer me wider range of well customized components (I became pretty slow at styling). I brought in Evergreen after several sampling and reads online but again, after several prototype development against Evergreen—since I was using TypeScript and I had to import custom Type, it felt exhaustive. After I validated Evergreen with the designs of the idea I was developing, I also noticed I might have to do a lot of styling. I later stumbled on Material Kit, the one specifically made for React . It was promising with beautifully crafted components, most of which fits into the designs pages I had on ground.

      A major problem of Material Kit for me is it isn't written in TypeScript and there isn't any plans to support its TypeScript version. I rolled up my sleeve and started converting their components to TypeScript and if you'll ask me, I am still on it.

      In summary, I used the Create React App with TypeScript support and I am spending some time converting Material Kit to TypeScript before I start developing against it. All of these components are going to be hosted on Bit.

      If you feel I am crazy or I have gotten something wrong, I'll be willing to listen to your opinion. Also, if you want to have a share of whatever TypeScript version of Material Kit I end up coming up with, let me know.

      See more