> But more importantly ... to business's eyes, Rust is too immature, Scala and F# inherit all the billion-dollar mistakes from their parent VMs, Julia is a data-scientist's tinker-tool and Haskell is too great a paradigm-shift for most programmers. So OCaml is far from being "dead", let alone meriting death.
In my previous business, we used Perl, C/C++, Julia, a little Python, and others. We aimed specifically for the best tool for the job. Rarely, if ever, did one language fit the bill, covering everything we need.
I've not used Ocaml, so I can't talk to this. I can state, emphatically, that julia is far more than you indicate. I am rust-curious, though haven't found a good reason to spend time with it at $dayjob. Similar for Perl6, and other more modern languages.
If you advocate a language for the sake of the language, rather than the set of problems you can efficiently express solutions to in that language, I'd argue you might be missing the point of the language. Paraphrasing Iverson on this, language and notation are tools for expressing thoughts. No single notation/language is perfect for all thoughts.
Brutal reductionism is a beautiful tool for cutting away all the fluff; seeing where different things are really multiple sides of the same die; and asking the young excited pimply-faced advocate of the newest fad, a rhetorical "so what?".