Live data from Hacker News

The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

cs.cmu.edu

11–20 of 82 posts

Re: The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

#11

Cutting to the chase: use Haskell or Scala or F# if you need to do some scripting or build a web application that requires lots of different tasks (being a web server, rendering templates, connecting to a database, etc.). Haskell and Scala have great libraries and polymorphism that allows you to express things succinctly. Dunno much about F# except .NET. Use OCaml if you want easily native binaries, predictable perfo…

Coming from Scala I'd like to see successor ML become a reality. Whether it's 1ML, Ponyo, Ur (without the /Web), or another ML derivative that's not OCaml (petty, but the crufty syntax makes Scala seem elegant in this regard) isn't all that important. As it stands every year Rossberg publishes a paper on latest 1ML enhancements; Harper does the same wrt to PLT, and by proxy SML. Meanwhile, nothing's really happening…

I find it interesting that you list all of the ML derivatives except the popular one.

Re: The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

#14
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coming from Scala I'd like to see successor ML become a reality. Whether it's 1ML, Ponyo, Ur (without the /Web), or another ML derivative that's not OCaml (petty, but the crufty syntax makes Scala seem elegant in this regard) isn't all that important. As it stands every year Rossberg publishes a paper on latest 1ML enhancements; Harper does the same wrt to PLT, and by proxy SML. Meanwhile, nothing's really happening…

I find it interesting that you list all of the ML derivatives except the popular one.

Poly/ML?

Re: The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

#15
post #14
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that you list all of the ML derivatives except the popular one.

Poly/ML?

No.

I mean, I know Tiobe isn't great, but the only ML-derivative I see on the top 50 is F#. ML and OCaml crack the top 100.

Re: The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

#16

Cutting to the chase: use Haskell or Scala or F# if you need to do some scripting or build a web application that requires lots of different tasks (being a web server, rendering templates, connecting to a database, etc.). Haskell and Scala have great libraries and polymorphism that allows you to express things succinctly. Dunno much about F# except .NET. Use OCaml if you want easily native binaries, predictable perfo…

  > operators (not named functions) are to programming
  > languages as icon-only buttons are to web pages;
  > they are completely unusable.
I see ( ) ; . you are using already. Latin letters are gibberish to people who don't use it.

Re: The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

#17
post #14
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that you list all of the ML derivatives except the popular one.

Poly/ML?

Poly/ML isn't an SML derivative, per se. It's an implementation of Standard ML (and a damn fine one at that).

Re: The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

#18
post #15
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poly/ML?

No. I mean, I know Tiobe isn't great, but the only ML-derivative I see on the top 50 is F#. ML and OCaml crack the top 100.

F# is an OCaml derivative. I'd reckon that OP's feelings about F# would be rather similar to their feelings about OCaml.

Re: The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

#19
post #16

Cutting to the chase: use Haskell or Scala or F# if you need to do some scripting or build a web application that requires lots of different tasks (being a web server, rendering templates, connecting to a database, etc.). Haskell and Scala have great libraries and polymorphism that allows you to express things succinctly. Dunno much about F# except .NET. Use OCaml if you want easily native binaries, predictable perfo…

> operators (not named functions) are to programming > languages as icon-only buttons are to web pages; > they are completely unusable. I see ( ) ; . you are using already. Latin letters are gibberish to people who don't use it.

I wrote some Scala just today:

  val list = a +: l :+ b
And I knew I had to put in a comment because that stuff always makes my eyes cross over when I come back to it.

Re: The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf]

#20

Cutting to the chase: use Haskell or Scala or F# if you need to do some scripting or build a web application that requires lots of different tasks (being a web server, rendering templates, connecting to a database, etc.). Haskell and Scala have great libraries and polymorphism that allows you to express things succinctly. Dunno much about F# except .NET. Use OCaml if you want easily native binaries, predictable perfo…

Holy cow, poly/ml looks outstanding, threads, sockets, signals, a ffi, a lot of things I've been missing in SML all these years. Is there support for unicode in the string library? How's the generated code performance wise? I will definitely keep an eye on this project.

Poly/ML produces excellent code. It's probably the second most performant SML implementation after MLton.
Post reply on HN