[ossopite]

I think you really are describing ocaml, which is a great language, although its ecosystem isn't the best. It probably inspired most of the features you mentioned in rust. It also supports OOP (hence the O) but it's easy to avoid.

That said, I wouldn't compare it to scripting languages. The lack of implicit conversions / traits / ad-hoc polymorphism means it's not that convenient for scripting.

[raphinou]

Fsharp, which originally was ocaml on dotnet, can also be run as scripts. It is a really practical way to start a project. I blogged about it here: https://asfaload.com/blog/fsharp-fsx-starting-point/

[int_19h]

F# was never really "OCaml on .NET", though, not really. ML on .NET, sure, but it is (and always has been) missing OCaml's most interesting features, such as functors and OO with inferred row-types.

[soulbadguy]

Fsharp is such a nice languange. Such a shame that I never seem to get the light it deserves. Between the alternative light syntax, type providers and first class "scripting" mode supported it really was a great middle point between fully scripting language and fast prototyping and full blow projects

[jeltz]

Ruby does very little implicit type conversion and is great for scripting. I think implicit type conversion is not required or even a good thing for scripting languages.

[threatofrain]

Implicit conversion is not obviously that convenient for scripting. The JS community has largely moved to anti-recommend implicit conversion, such as by basically striking `==` from their vocabulary.

[xigoi]

What makes OCaml inconvenient for scripting is how difficult it is to run code that uses some external libraries. You basically need to create a whole project structure with several config files, which creates a lot of friction compared to `import numpy as np`.

[nerdponx]

Nim was great along these lines when I tried it. But that was before the v2.0 which apparently was accompanied by drama and a fork.

[rattray]

What happened?