When comparing Objective-C vs Haxe, the Slant community recommends Haxe for most people. In the question“What is the best programming language to learn first?” Haxe is ranked 23rd while Objective-C is ranked 57th. The most important reason people chose Haxe is:
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Well Documented
Objective-C's documentation exists on Apple's website, and explains language features in detail.
Pro Develop Apple applications
Similar to C# and Java, but used to develop native applications for Apple hardware.
Pro Objective-C supports an open style of dynamic binding
A style that can accommodate a simple architecture for interactive user interfaces.
Pro Compiles to multiple platforms and languages
Haxe allows you to develop for Web, iOS, Android, Blackberry, Windows, OSX, Linux and others, all at once, without the need to switch languages and maintain separate code bases.
Support for even more platforms and languages is under development.
Pro Powerfully expressive but easy to learn
The language was designed to be very expressive with the smallest possible amount of syntactic sugar. There are actually fewer keywords than other languages with similar power.
Pro Pick up errors at compile time
Pro Code reuse server side and client side
You can use the same classes on the server as you do on the client where applicable. This saves a lot of time.
Pro Syntactic macros
Syntactic macros allow you to extend compiler features at the syntax tree step. Macros come into play after code is parsed into the abstract syntax tree, and macros allow you to transform it before the rest of the compilation completes.
This provides for immense power, while at the same time scoping the extensibility at a level that is powerful, but well constrained.
Pro First class code completion
Code completion is built into the compiler and available to the IDE allowing for much smarter code completion that can actually parse and understand the syntax tree.
Pro Extremely fast compilation.
Haxe can easily compile over 100,000 lines of code to JS in seconds on a mid-spec computer
Pro Ability to use existing JS libraries
Haxe has the ability to use "externs". These are haxe files which describe the usage of existing JS libraries. Get code completion and compile-time-checking for everything from jQuery to Node.js.
Even without externs, native JS code can still be used through untyped code.
Pro Large library support. From servers to games.
Pro Small, readable output
The output that is generated can be trimmed using "dead code elimination" to only include those functions and libraries that are strictly necessary. All code is very readable with only minimal extras for specific functionality.
Small output is good for frontend development as file size is a major concern.
Pro Established project.
Haxe has been around for more than 10 years (since 2005) and whilst not the most popular project, has had continuous growth.
Highly unlikely to disappear or for support to stop.
Pro Powerful type inference with strong typing
After a type is inferred from its context, it cannot be changed to a new type, and type safety is done at compile time so it stays safe without the extra maintenance required for static typing.
Pro Algebraic data types and pattern matching.
Pro Friendly community
Pro Offload execution to the server with remoting
Using a remoting proxy you can get type safe server to client communications, allowing for remote method execution on the server as if they were part of the client side code.
Pro Package management like Java
Package tree is just directory tree, it's wonderful!
Pro Available in NPM
Pro Builtin conditional compilation support
Haxe supports conditional compilation, so depending on compiler flags Haxe will include or exlcude sections of your code. Making it easy to have debug and release builds.
Pro Create without needing to be limited to a language, target, or commercial ecosystem
Pro Abstract enums allow constants with exhaustiveness check
You can define constants in an abstract enum and when used in a switch/case statement Haxe checks for exhaustiveness, making sure every constant is covered - with no runtime implication.
Pro Type safety for exísting JS libraries
Haxe compiler will check types when using externs for existing libraries.
Pro Abstracts allows me to create more intative api's without runtime overhead
Pro Can create complex applications without needing webpack, npm or other crutches, unless I want.
Haxe has the power and expression to not need the npm dependancy hell that is common in js and typescript, bit it's still simple.
Pro Ability to skip type checking when calling non Haxe code
You should use externs when calling non Haxe code, but if you just need to call one or two external JS functions, you can skip type checking by calling untyped code.
Con Odd Syntax
Objective C's syntax is very alien to other languages. Learning Objective-C first will fail to expose you to a syntax style that would be relatively familiar in almost any other language.
Con Tied into Apple's eco-system.
Con More Technical
To be able to do basic tasks in Objective-C requires a strong understanding of programming.
Con Requires Understanding of C-language.
Objective-C is built on top of C, and as such, requires at least a basic understanding of how to program in C.
Con Might as well learn Swift
Swift works almost anywhere Objective C does, and it was designed to replace Objective C.
Some popular libs like JQuery have maintained externs, for any specific code or lib already in JS you have to write the externs to use it in your haxe application.
Con Bad support in popular IDEs
Con No Qt support
There is currently no support for Qt.
Con Full programs only
You can create small utility functions with Haxe, but generally it is a lot more work than with other JS compilers. Haxe is best used when you have a larger project.