SML (6)

1 Name: #!/usr/bin/anonymous : 2007-07-16 04:44 ID:l3yk4gRw

I want to program SML instead of lisp.
I can't tell if it will be more of less painful though,

What do you guys think of SML and what experiences do you have with it?

2 Name: dmpk2k!hinhT6kz2E : 2007-07-16 05:37 ID:Heaven

Hopefully it's not too closely related with Ocaml, which is a mess.

One thing I like about ML is that it has type inference -- like Haskell -- but it isn't purely functional.

3 Name: #!/usr/bin/anonymous : 2007-07-16 17:42 ID:Heaven

I had to take a class taught in SML once, and it is pretty much my least favourite functional language ever.

4 Name: #!/usr/bin/anonymous : 2007-07-26 20:47 ID:o4Pp7tR7

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT WASTE YOUR LIFE ON SML!!! THERES A REASON WHY NOBODY USES IT! You'll bang your head against the utter inflexibility of the language again and again (die tuples, DIE!). And then there's the lack of semi decent quick reference documentation.

Either that or my instructor really knew how to torture people using SML and if you don't use in the retarded way he did then it might be a semi decent language.

5 Name: #!/usr/bin/anonymous : 2007-07-27 06:44 ID:l3yk4gRw

>>4
hmmmm

6 Name: #!/usr/bin/anonymous : 2007-08-03 06:08 ID:Heaven

Asking whether SML is more or less painful than LISP is like asking whether having nails hammered into your testicles is more painful than having a cheese grater inserted into your rectum.

Return Entire thread Last 50 posts
This thread has been closed. You cannot post in this thread any longer.