book VS eioio

Some of your questions might be answered in this book (free online version): https://dev.realworldocaml.org/

I don't think they're wrong

the Jane Street side are quite prolific with blog posts etc

as a newcomer to OCaml one of the first, and nicer-looking, intro resources you'll likely encounter is the Real World OCaml book https://dev.realworldocaml.org/ which unfortunately does everything using Base instead of the stdlib

Personally that didn't sit right to me and I prefer to use the stdlib by default (which seems fine and not in need of a wholesale replacement)

This is an oldie but a goodie.

OCaml has, unlike Standard ML, grown quite a lot since this page was made.

In particular, the section "Standard libraries", I'd recommend looking at:

https://dev.realworldocaml.org/

A couple of places where the comparison is outdated:

- OCaml using Base [1] allows for result-type oriented programming

- OCaml using Base uses less language magic and more module system

While there was and is truth to the distinction that SML is for scientists and OCaml is for engineers, this dichotomy is getting dated: OCaml is under active development, which means that scientists who want better tooling will choose OCaml. For example, 1ML [2] by Andreas Rossberg was built in OCaml.

[1]: https://opensource.janestreet.com/base/

Real World OCaml (version 2 is finally out) is also pretty good.

Real World OCaml is also a good resource, geared more towards people who already have some programming experience and want a more industry/practical focused learning experience.

ocaml.org’s new website is packed with lots of great early intros.

most learners eventually gravitate towards Real World OCaml https://dev.realworldocaml.org/ for additional learning.

Unfortunately, the learning resources for different domains out there isn’t as highly curated or prolific as, say, rust. If you do web dev like me, it takes a bit more work to find the tools and put them together. But the language itself lends itself well to systems level programming.

Fortunately, the forum is a great help.

In general, better read the second edition which is updated to use current Core versions. A print version was published recently.

I recommend https://dev.realworldocaml.org/ and https://cs3110.github.io/textbook/cover.html

Elm is not dead. It just prefers a slow release schedule but is still actively worked on in the background.

That said, you might want to check out OCaml for general purpose programming. Super fast compiler, great performance, can target both native and JS.

It is easier to use than Haskell due to defaulting to eager evaluation (like most languages) strategy instead of laziness and being generally more pragmatic, offering more escape hatches into the imperative world if need be. Plus great upward trajectory with lot's of cool stuff like an effects system and multi-core support coming.

Real World Ocaml is a decent resource: https://dev.realworldocaml.org/

the actual project (Readme has some code samples): https://github.com/ocaml-multicore/eio

For 5.0+ you might want to look at https://github.com/ocaml-multicore/eio for how effects can make async much more pleasant

Great post! I would love to see this extended to OCaml 5 (with eio) and Haskell

Second, effects enable a new style of concurrency libraries like eio that forgoes the need to wrap every asynchronous computation in a monad.

> This is realllly unidiomatic in real world Haskell.

Whether idiomatic or not does not matter. It proves my point:

IO won't save you, and even very mundane effects are not part of the game…

Idris is the "better Haskell" sure, but the effect tracking is still part of the uncanny valley (still IO monad based).

Koka is a toy, and Frank mostly "only a paper" (even there is some code out there).

The "Frank concept" is to some degree implemented in the Unison language, though:

https://www.unison-lang.org/learn/fundamentals/abilities/

Having a notion of co-effects (or however you please to call them) is imho actually much more important than talking about effects (as effects are in fact neither values nor types—something that all the IO kludges get wrong).

I think the first practicable approach in the mainstream about this topic will be what gets researched and developed for Scala. The main take away is that you need to look at things form the co-effects side first and foremost!

In case anybody is interested in what happens in Scala land in this regard:

https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/aLE9M37d...

https://docs.scala-lang.org/scala3/reference/experimental/cc...

But also the development in OCaml seems interesting:

https://github.com/ocaml-multicore/eio#design-note-capabilit...

Look mom, "effects", but without the monad headache!

To enable access to all these features, an exciting new library called Eio is being developed. It uses a new paradigm of direct-style concurrent I/O programming, without the need for monads or async/await, thus avoiding the function colour problem.