Nekoc vs nekoml

1

I know (no I don’t) that Neko might now have a looming Best Before date, but until then…

For Rosetta Code examples, would it be more useful for straight up nekoc Neko source listings, or should nekoml get more press? Should they be separate on Rosetta Code? Neko and NekoML.

Also, would some hand written NXML examples be of any use for Haxe related chrestomathies?

Have good, make code

2

It’s the whole interpreter neko which is getting more and more replaced,
as for both neko the language and nekoml well I don’t think anybody really used them.

Neko was created as a vm for haxe to target, and neko(ml) was used in a couple of files to bootstrap it all.

Now I’m not saying you can’t use them, but these are very basic language that don’t have any activity.
If you still want to use it, nekoml is described as

NekoML is a high-order functional language with type inference. It can be seen as Neko with a powerful static type system. It is very suitable for complex data structure manipulation, such as is performed by compilers.

So I don’t know if it would be easier to use than raw neko, but it’s more powerful.

3

Thanks, @ibilon,

I’m going to keep on exploring Neko, I’ll pester the board when a Rosetta Code entry might need a technical truth pass, and such. There are a fair number NekoML source files to read through, should suffice to help get started on some simple tasks.

Have good,
Brian