▲ | StopDisinfo910 4 days ago | |||||||
> I feel if OCaml had got its act together around about 2010 with multicore and a few other annoyances[1] OCaml had its act together. It was significantly nicer than Python when I used it professionally in 2010. Just look at what JaneStreet achieved with it. The main impediment to OCaml was always that it was not American nor mainly developed from the US. People like to believe there is some technical merit to language popularity but the reality it’s all fashion based. Rust is popular because they did a ton of outreach. They used to pay someone full time to mostly toot their horn. | ||||||||
▲ | jvican 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Hear, hear. This theory also explains why other languages such as Scala were never really mainstream despite allowing Java- and Kotlin- style programming and having a much broader follower base in Europe. Lack of outreach, concerted marketing, and advocacy from American companies that have always dominated the narrative. | ||||||||
▲ | nothrabannosir 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
Python, PHP, Ruby: all not American though, right? Do you mean those only got hockey stick growth when they happened to get picked up by the USA ? But then couldn’t the same have happened for ocaml? And if so: why didn’t it, as it supposedly did for the others Not to mention Linux I guess | ||||||||
|