There are plenty of people who use scala as an ML on the JVM, not as a worse Haskell. They just aren't as loud about it.
If you're looking for an ML kind of experience, Kotlin is a joke, it doesn't even have pattern matching.
If you're looking for an ML kind of experience, Kotlin is a joke, it doesn't even have pattern matching.
Can't agree with this more. I just cannot figure the raison d'être of Kotlin.
If I had to build a company today Kotlin would definitely be at the top of my list; I may love other languages much more, but Kotlin and C# are easily at the top of the developer experience imo, since they've got great tooling/ecosystem/support and both are very approachable/average languages that won't really scare anyone away like how Haskell might (despite it being one of the most underrated/most scare monegered/most misunderstood languages out there imo)
ML on the JVM seems like a nice niche for it, but I'm not sure I really have seen libraries or Scala devs sorta advertise their style/library as ML inspired. I've seen OCaml mentioned as an inspiration to Scala before, but there are some notable differences between the two (e.g. inheritance vs structural typing)
http://www.lihaoyi.com/post/StrategicScalaStylePrincipleofLe...
especially the reasoning that you should try to avoid mutability, but when something is mutable, just make it mutable. This is much more in line with ML approach than with typical Haskell concerns around effects systems.