There are over 300 stories with OCaml in the title and over 500 comments mentioning OCaml. OCaml has seen a bit of a renaissance over the past several years and I think it deserves its own tag.
There are over 300 stories with OCaml in the title and over 500 comments mentioning OCaml. OCaml has seen a bit of a renaissance over the past several years and I think it deserves its own tag.
OCaml basically owns the ml tag at the moment. OCaml effectively has its own tag, the question is whether the ML family languages that fall under that tag need their own tag separate of OCaml, not whether OCaml does.
Further, if they do, might it be better to fission them into
ocamlandsmlsince that broadly characterizes the groupings?Has a notion of tag unions been discussed at all? Perhaps with covariance and contravariance? :P
[Comment removed by author]
site:lobste.rs haskell 1,300 results
site:lobste.rs ocaml 916 results
site:lobste.rs sml 129
site:lobste.rs “standard ml” 59
It’s not that far apart between Haskell and OCaml. Haskell and OCaml each effectively have their own tag, with the remainder of the ML family being a weak case for having their own.
For comparison, “react” has over 600 results, still doesn’t have its own tag. Ends up falling under a mix of browser/mobile/web/js. “ml” is a better fit for ocaml-alikes like bucklescript too.
reactdefinitely sounds like it deserves a category. Maybereactivefor all sorts of reactive-style programming?