4 ms·
For those like me who internally struggle on which is the preferable language to study in depth (OCaml or SML), here is a practical source for SML: http://only
by Xurinos 15y ago
For those like me who internally struggle on which is the preferable language to study in depth (OCaml or SML), here is a practical source for SML:
http://only.mawhrin.net/~alexey/sysprogsml.pdf http://only.mawhrin.net/~alexey/sysprogsml.pdf
- swannodette 15y agoI've been learning SML via this book, http://www.amazon.com/Elements-ML-Programming-ML97-2nd/dp/0137903871 http://www.amazon.com/Elements-ML-Programming-ML97-2nd/dp/01... Quite good and filled with the kind of exercises that help the language really sink in. Also the OS X installation process for SML/NJ has recently become quite simple. One big difference between OCaml and SML is that ocamlopt makes it dead simple to create executables for a wide variety of platforms, and that is not so easy w/ SML/NJ.
- gaius 15y agoAlso see: http://www.amazon.co.uk/ML-Working-Programmer-Larry-Paulson/dp/052156543X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1305928550&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.co.uk/ML-Working-Programmer-Larry-Paulson/...
- jemfinch 15y agoI find SML a much "prettier" language than OCaml, but OCaml is much more widely used and maintained; SML seems to be largely a dead language now.
- swannodette 15y agoI still think SML is worthy of study - it's a great introduction to functional programming with an advanced type system w/o the additional complexity that laziness and monads bring to Haskell.