[MLton] using MLBs for scripting
Brent Fulgham
bfulg@pacbell.net
Thu, 16 Sep 2004 23:02:28 -0700
On 2004-09-16 14:09:52 -0700 Stephen Weeks <sweeks@sweeks.com> wrote:
>> typed language is "ideal" for scripts and is an advantage. To the
>> contrary the REPL, fast compile, and static error checking of
>> SML/NJ, I
>> found, enhanced the speed of scripting.
>
> I agree completely.
So ... can we hope for a REPL in the near future? I think that's the
main thing
holding me back from using it more at this point.
> Yes, I think libraries is the next big issue to tackle with MLton --
> both adding new ones, and having a nice system for packaging,
> downloading, updating, keeping dependencies etc. For this release,
PLT Scheme recently created the "PLaneT" system, which does this for
Scheme (PLT Scheme). We might want to think about something similar.
(see http://planet.plt-scheme.org/)
Of course, this was build on top of an existing packaging system that
had been
used to distribute various modules in a piece-meal fashion, but the
idea might
still be applicable.
-Brent