7 ms·

OCaml is Object Caml right? What about SML? I always loved SML, but it never got any traction at all. The O in Ocaml always turned me off, they cluttered up th

• detrino 13y ago
  Ocaml was always the more pragmatic language and for a long time the implementation was significantly faster than anything SML offered. MLton came along very late in the game and offers excellent performance, but doesn't support separate compilation. Edit: A more lengthy comparison: http://adam.chlipala.net/mlcomp/ http://adam.chlipala.net/mlcomp/
  • marktangotango 13y ago
    Thanks for the perspective!
• zem 13y ago
  what saddens me is that aliceml [https://www.ps.uni-saarland.de/alice/ https://www.ps.uni-saarland.de/alice/] seems to have died. i've kept it vaguely in the back of my mind as "this looks like a very pleasant language, and as soon as i have a problem in its sweet spot i'll give it a good look", but the last time i went to look at it i realised the last mailing list post was in 2012, and the last home page update in 2007.
• spyder81 13y ago
  For me (the author), it's because SML as it was taught to me is a closed language. It can never and will never change. Perfect for education, perhaps not so useful as a career choice. OCaml has been moving forward; GADTs were added recently, multicore support is coming, and who knows what else is on the horizon.