<story><title>Why OCaml, Why Now?</title><url>http://spyder.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/why-ocaml-why-now/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>chimeracoder</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m glad that the author is picking up a new functional programming language, but choosing OCaml over Haskell because of support for the Javascript implementations strikes me as choosing a BMW over a Mercedes[0] because of the number of cupholders it has.&lt;p&gt;If you don&amp;#x27;t have a particular goal in mind (ie, &amp;quot;I work at Jane Street and need to be compatible with our existing code&amp;quot;), there are a number of other factors in the OCaml vs. Haskell discussion that are far more important.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; JS is the only realistic way to write web apps&lt;p&gt;Javascript is the only realistic way to write &lt;i&gt;the front-end&lt;/i&gt; of webapps. But that doesn&amp;#x27;t mean you&amp;#x27;re wedded to it for your backend technology. And I don&amp;#x27;t think &lt;i&gt;either&lt;/i&gt; OCaml or Haskell have sufficiently advanced DOM bindings, etc. that I&amp;#x27;d recommend using either one for client-side work in the browser.&lt;p&gt;[0] I&amp;#x27;m not sure if this is a flamewar topic for car nerds - my point is to pick two high-end luxury cars that are both well-respected and each have their own merits.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>skybrian</author><text>It sounds like you have a very language-centric view of the world. In practice, deployment is everything. (Why do people write code in Objective C? Because iPhone.)&lt;p&gt;Having a solid implementation for your target platform is very good reason to pick a language.</text></comment>
<story><title>Why OCaml, Why Now?</title><url>http://spyder.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/why-ocaml-why-now/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>chimeracoder</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m glad that the author is picking up a new functional programming language, but choosing OCaml over Haskell because of support for the Javascript implementations strikes me as choosing a BMW over a Mercedes[0] because of the number of cupholders it has.&lt;p&gt;If you don&amp;#x27;t have a particular goal in mind (ie, &amp;quot;I work at Jane Street and need to be compatible with our existing code&amp;quot;), there are a number of other factors in the OCaml vs. Haskell discussion that are far more important.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; JS is the only realistic way to write web apps&lt;p&gt;Javascript is the only realistic way to write &lt;i&gt;the front-end&lt;/i&gt; of webapps. But that doesn&amp;#x27;t mean you&amp;#x27;re wedded to it for your backend technology. And I don&amp;#x27;t think &lt;i&gt;either&lt;/i&gt; OCaml or Haskell have sufficiently advanced DOM bindings, etc. that I&amp;#x27;d recommend using either one for client-side work in the browser.&lt;p&gt;[0] I&amp;#x27;m not sure if this is a flamewar topic for car nerds - my point is to pick two high-end luxury cars that are both well-respected and each have their own merits.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>fzltrp</author><text>Car metaphors don&amp;#x27;t always match well with the situations they try to illustrate. Obviously if you had the chance to be offered either one of these two cars, you&amp;#x27;d probably try them out and pick the one you feel the most comfortable with, but also which would best fit your needs. If all other factors have been weighted, and it boils down to the number of cup holders, would you stop there short of making a choice, because of the apparent superficiality of the argument? The author expressed his interest in both languages, and brought other arguments than just the js one.</text></comment>