Talk:ML (programming language)

Sympathy

Since ML was created to be as easy as possible to use, it is as hard as possible to use. The ML community is a camouflaged SM organization, the users are the masochists, the implementors are the sadists and the cover story is functional static programming from a mathematical view. If you don't get enough pain from ML, you should try Haskell or nail beds.

- Rebuttal **

The sense of discipline that ML installs in the programmer is absolutely unrivalled, the fussy type checking ensures that simply getting the interpreter to accept your code is a sense of achievement; actually RUNNING the code is an anti-climax. Which is a good way to have it; I'd much rather have all my nasty surprises at parse-time rather than run-time. I believe that I am a much better programmer for the 3 years that I used ML. For a programming language whose main purpose is University teaching, I'd say that's a high recommendation.

Example

Can someone conversant in ML fix the example? It is a cut a paste from the Haskell article and contains some obvious errors. For example, there is reference made to the "third line" but the example is only two lines. Osmodiar 18:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with Basic?

It's simplistic and inexpressive. But Talk:BASIC is the correct place to discuss that. — Haeleth Talk 21:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is SML/NJ categorised under imperative programming languages?

Because it's possible to write a 100% imperative program in it. :)

It is also categorised under functional programming languages: "ML language family" is a subcategory of "Functional languages", so everything in it is automatically considered functional. — Haeleth Talk 08:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]