Why ML/OCaml are good for writing compilers (1998)
After learning Elm I wanted to understand ML/OCaml a bit more, so I worked through some documentation from the OCaml site and walked away pleasantly surprised.<p>After using it for a couple of weeks I am confused why ML/OCaml aren't more popular. They are safe, functional, stable, fast, and have great tooling. They seem poised to take over the functional domain.<p>While the syntax took a little getting used to ( emphasis on little) once you are used to it, it's very natural. Union types are wonderful, and the implicit type safety within programs was nice.