ML structures/signatures/functors are gone IMHO due to namespaces and F# modules. As I know attempts to be more close to Haskell fail, so Microsoft decides to switch to ML as own dialect. All decisions were taken because of .NET architecture, sure (and OOP is close to .NET, original Ocaml OOP was not easy adapting). But for me it looks cool. For example, syntax for objects looks canonical, not like something alien for ML. My IMHO is that Microsoft takes right direction in F# as well as C#.

From: Donn Cave
Sent: 12 июля 2018 г. 20:21
To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Investing in languages (Was: What is yourfavourite Haskell "aha" moment?)

quoth Joachim Durchholz <jo@durchholz.org>

> F# is OCaml, ported and adapted to .net.

> Or at least it started that way; I don't know how far they have diverged.

Rather far.  Don't quote me, I know only what I've read about F# and

am not sure I know that, but lots of Objective CAML was tossed, and

of course there's a lot of .NET.  The syntax apparently uses significant

white space, so that's one huge step forward if it works - the standard

Objective CAML syntax is quite evil in that respect.  But I believe the

interesting parts are gone: modules, and the OOP implementation, which

I have the impression might be one of the more respectable OO designs.

           Donn

_______________________________________________

Haskell-Cafe mailing list

To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:

http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.