First of all, I have to confess that I’ve started to see the light of F# and AST manipulation.

A few days ago I announced that I was working on a generic DSL parser : http://rogeralsing.com/2010/03/23/generic-dsl-grammar-and-parser/
I’m now porting the code to F# since it is more suited for AST traversal.

About a year ago I blogged about an idea of an extensible language; http://rogeralsing.com/2009/03/18/an-intentional-extensible-language/ 
Since then, I have been experimenting with this concept quite a bit.

Here in sweden there are currently circulating some email with a challange about solving a math puzzle.
It’s nothing special really but the mail goes something like this (translated):
(Don’t blame me for the claims in the quote, it’s not my words)

I’ve been toying around with the Reactive Extensions (RX) Framework for .NET 4 the last few days and I think I’ve found a quite nice usecase for it;
Since RX is all about sequences of events/messages, it does fit very well together with any sort of message bus or event broker.

I’m still trying to learn a bit of F# and I thought of a quite nice experiment.
Since F# supports quotations (for you C# devs, think Linq Expressions on roids) wouldn’t it be possible to serialize such quotation and pass it to a webservice and execute that code there?

Here is one such example where F# developers try to make it look like F# can do things that C# can not.

I think that Microsoft are trying to sell F# to us as something new and awesome, but I’m having serious problems seeing the benefits over C#.

I predict that the C# 4 “dynamic” keyword will be the most abused feature.
It will be used for everything from ducktyped dependency injection, dynamic dictionaries and about a million Rails like frameworks.
All in a very non refactor friendly way.
…It will rarely be used to interop with dynamic .NET languages.

Dynamic where clause using Linq To SQL:​