Hacker News Reader

Comment by lambda_foo | Hacker News Reader

It's not clear to me why you'd choose OCaml over Haskell. I understand that OCaml isn't lazily evaluated like Haskell and has a simpler to understand compiler which gives a better understanding how the code will perform at runtime. But why as someone new why would I choose OCaml over Haskell?

From my perspective it seems like there is more activity and research going on in Haskell.

View on HN

> I understand that OCaml isn't lazily evaluated like Haskell and has a simpler to understand compiler which gives a better understanding how the code will perform at runtime. But why as someone new why would I choose OCaml over Haskell?

Isn't that enough to choose OCaml over Haskell?

Why would that be enough on its own? If that alone is sufficient, he should choose C over both OCaml and Haskell.

Haskell comes with a very big community, and a lot of ways to start with the languages. I think about the http://learnyouahaskell.com/ and others.

Real World OCaml is that, without totally being it. The authors wrote it with the idea in mind that only people with a good background about functionnal world can read it.

I'd add that lazyness can be a good thing and that the type-system of Haskell is better than the OCaml one.

As I'm aware, finance industry now prefers F#. Regarding Haskell - one of its biggest user (Standard Chartered I think) uses in-house dialect of it, miu, which is strict. Basically, it just syntactically resembles Haskell... i.e. you can't just use some random Haskell library with it.

Where did you hear about this? Googling around for "miu", "miu haskell", "miu haskell standard chartered", "miu haskell standard chartered strict", etc hasn't given me anything.

It's "mu" not "miu". I think they gave a talk on it at CUFP one year.

Pure Haskell is slow, that is why.

[citation needed]

Reply on news.ycombinator.com