Isn’t multi-core OCaml merged into their master branch now?
I admit I don’t follow religiously, but I think I read it somewhere… or not.
Go is just a teensy bit less verbosive. You are right about the rest. Go is actually highly specialized.
Just a speculation. I’ve been working on – and observed – tech that was extremely biased towards single core. Reworking that has been a hell, every time, and we ended up with nasty and near-impossible-to-reproduce bugs, every time. I am not crapping on OCaml’s creators, I am simply skeptical for now.
2 Likes
Less verbose in syntax perhaps, but you usually end up having to rewrite a LOT of code because it doesn’t have patterns that are built in to about every other language, so the overall code usually ends up a lot larger than the equivalent Rust or C++ or Elixir or so. ^.^
It’s similar to Haskell, which is entirely multi-core capable, OCaml’s backend is similar (though far more optimized) in that the GC is the only real hold-up, and in MCOCaml that was entirely rewritten to be built into the effects system (it is even considering to be possible to maybe build without a global GC at all). OCaml is one of those very slow moving but extremely well designed languages. They do not accept anything into mainline unless it is very well tested, has a very good usecase that is not easily covered by other methods, and is fully documented in the spec. It’s one of the things I love about OCaml is that it has a fantastic spec (as complete as C++'s, much easier to read). 
I wish Elixir had a spec, almost every language has a spec so that seems weird to me… >.>
I’ve been watching the mainline repo and I’ve not seen it yet, but I do keep seeing a large number of PR’s of individual backend fixups and API additions to facilitate the big merge being added. It seems to be winding up more over time though, which is quite exciting. ^.^
4 Likes
