> Sure, it was theoretically possible if you did a ton of work, but no one did that, because it would have been a huge amount of work (seriously, a lot).

I think I communicated unclearly. It sounds like you read my statement as "run the exact same code in node or OCaml" which I agree would have been very hard. I had a much simpler multi-service setup where I could share some business logic.

Basically I had two services with the code unique to them stored in different directories, /ocaml-server and /node-server respectively. Both called into a common /lib directory. /ocaml-server had some very hot loops in it, /node-server had more standard business-y code that hooked various npm packages.

Hello! Indeed, I did misunderstand you. I agree that it was possible to share some parts of the code between Reason's JS target with BuckleScript, and native target with the stock OCaml compiler. I think a pretty reasonable number of people did that. Actually, it's still possible to this day even with ReScript e.g. https://github.com/aantron/dream/tree/master/example/w-fulls...

> Between the breaking changes and the general change in development philosophy...switching to the ReScript compiler for my project would have required nearly a complete rewrite.

There were perhaps a couple of minor breaking changes but can you explain why it would have required a near complete rewrite? I wasn't aware of anything major like that. ReScript even supported and as far as I know, to this day continues to support the old Reason syntax.