I'm saying F# is worse than it could be because it needed to be compatible with the .net framework. I disagree. I would say the opposite: That F# is a better l

I'm saying F# is worse than it could be because it needed to be compatible with the .net framework. I disagree. I would say the opposite: That F# is a better language because it can access the rich set of libraries that already exist in the .NET ecosystem. You seem to think that's a bad thing. I don't think many would agree with that. I think it's certainly innovative to have created a functional, static type-inference based language that can sit on top of the .NET runtime as a first-class citizen. Building a library is not innovative in and of itself, and there is nothing in linq's concepts or execution which is novel or innovative. Incidentally, LINQ is not 'just' a library. It can translate code written in a higher level language by examining the expression-tree that the code compiles down to. This is sort-of a poor man's lisp macros built into a statically typed language.