Re: [Caml-list] ReasonML concrete syntax

[Viet Le <vietlq85@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1651 bytes --]

Yawar, crediting the popularity of Rust because of syntax is misleading.
Mozilla has marketing budget and people behind Rust have build very active
community with weekly newsletter and know how to market. OCaml is mostly
used by academia and some industry players, and marketing is not being
emphasized.

ReasonML is not gaining because of syntax, it's because of huge marketing
effort and easy to follow tutorials and examples and catchy websites. OCaml
documentation is as plain as plain can get. Rust has a few catchy websites,
tutorials and free books as well.

Viet.

On 11 December 2017 at 16:10, Ian Zimmerman <itz@very.loosely.org> wrote:

> On 2017-12-11 15:40, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
>
> > although, with currified functions this is only an illusion
>
> As they say, "this".  The alternative syntax will lead to people never
> learning about partial application.
>
> Does your own language curry multiple arguments by default like Ocaml
> does?  If yes, then (IMO) your choice is a mistake, in spite of the
> (good) arguments you give for it.
>
> I would be more tolerant about such syntax in a SML-like language where
> multiple arguments are modelled with tuples in most cases.
>
> --
> Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
> if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
> To reply privately _only_ on Usenet, fetch the TXT record for the domain.
>
> --
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>



-- 
Kind regards,
Viet

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2625 bytes --]