3 ms·
F# was never really "OCaml on .NET", though, not really. ML on .NET, sure, but it is (and always has been) missing OCaml's most interesting features, such as fu
by int_19h 2y ago
F# was never really "OCaml on .NET", though, not really. ML on .NET, sure, but it is (and always has been) missing OCaml's most interesting features, such as functors and OO with inferred row-types.
- raphinou 2y agoIt probably was too much of a shortcut, thanks for the correction.
- int_19h 2y agoThey have kinda positioned themselves that way and had (have?) syntactic compatibility with a subset of OCaml. And OCaml is probably the least obscure of the ML language family, so it's not exactly surprising.