[MLton] Hmmm.... ML

[Daniel C. Wang]

They are not far along at all from what I can tell, and even if they are 
someone should offer to translate what they have into SML.

I spamed the list already, but I think it be good if someone for the 
MLton side pinged the list too and asked "what do we need to do for you 
guys to use SML" :)

For the first time in a long whiled the ossified nature of the SML 
language standard is a feature when compared to Ocaml! If they do 
actually use OCaml for the Javascript spec,we should just just give up 
on SML. Because if we can convince people to use SML for this 
application what can we convince people to use SML over Ocaml for!

Stephen Weeks wrote:
>> http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1784
>>     
>
> I saw that.
>
>   
>> I wonder how fast a MLton compiled version of the spec would be..
>>     
>
> Sadly, we won't know.  From the note:
>
>   "we'll be using OCaml extended with first-class continuations"
>
> I don't know how far along they are.  Perhaps I should send Brendan a
> note explaining to him the advantages of using MLton/SML.
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLton mailing list
> MLton at mlton.org
> http://mlton.org/mailman/listinfo/mlton
>