I would like to point out that the article does not use the words “succeed” or “fail”, and makes no claim about whether SML “succeeded” or “failed”. Indeed I d

I would like to point out that the article does not use the words “succeed” or “fail”, and makes no claim about whether SML “succeeded” or “failed”. Indeed I don't think that is a useful question to ask. My article was trying to address a much less nebulous issue: what problems did I personally see with SML in the mid 1990s that let me to abandon it at that time.