Skip to content

Comment on Compiler Development: Rust or OCaml?parent

Comments

I think we're cycling back towards a general preference for statically typed languages, for one thing. Additionally, a number of traditionally functional language characteristics have been finding more widespread adoption among popular languages. Putting these together, OCaml is on a short list of languages that are functional and statically typed and, uh, perhaps "intuitive" is the word I want — Haskell is not very intuitive for many people due to its lazy evaluation scheme.

In my opinion, OCaml would see even more widespread use if the documentation were improved. I find it a chore to figure out how to use OCaml well. I also would like to use third-party libraries like Jane Street's Base because they've put a lot of work into providing even more functionality in their standard library, but their documentation is absolutely atrocious (where it exists at all).

OCaml is a mature language but does not have a very supportive ecosystem. I'm hoping the renewed interest will prompt changes there.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.