Re:Evolving the OCaml Programming Language (2025)
by StopDisinfo910 on Saturday September 06, 2025 @12:34PM
(#45150725)
> The module system though powerful is quite awkward and verbose.
Deeply disagree. It’s a lot easier to use and reason about that type classes. You can use Haskell if that’s what you want anyway. I’m glade Ocaml isn’t Haskell.
> Yes, effects are definitely a cutting edge feature in OCaml. But they are untyped which is a big limitation I would say.
APersonally I think it’s an insignificant limitation for a feature existing approximately nowhere else. Anyway I think we have safely killed your initial argument that Ocaml was somehow lagging behind.
Deeply disagree. It’s a lot easier to use and reason about that type classes. You can use Haskell if that’s what you want anyway. I’m glade Ocaml isn’t Haskell.
> Yes, effects are definitely a cutting edge feature in OCaml. But they are untyped which is a big limitation I would say.
APersonally I think it’s an insignificant limitation for a feature existing approximately nowhere else. Anyway I think we have safely killed your initial argument that Ocaml was somehow lagging behind.