This kind of comments make me really sad. Most ReasonML developers are actually "JavaScript developers".

ReasonML was specifically designed for JavaScript developers. Being JavaScript-friendly is in it's DNA really. I even see ReasonML a language that was specifically designed to work with React.

I can understand why you would feel this way though. I think the main problem is that ReasonML introduces new concepts that simply do not exist in JavaScript. Learning those concepts is hard. But if it wasn't hard, would you be learning anything or just writing JavaScript in a slightly different way?

Are there any specific examples of things that look too "distant" from JavaScript?

I'll finish this by saying that ReasonML will make you a better JavaScript developer. As will probably learning any other language that challenges the way you think.

> I'll finish this by saying that ReasonML will make you a better JavaScript developer. As will probably learning any other language that challenges the way you think.

I wholeheartedly agree! But a lot of people don't want to be challenged by the language when there are already plenty of other challenges in their personal and professional lives.

With TypeScript you don't need to think half as much, and the thing your boss generally cares about (whether the feature shipped) gets done.

> With TypeScript you don't need to think half as much

That seems a bit dangerous, to be honest. TypeScript has an unsound type system. If you don't think carefully, you might end up shipping runtime type errors.

Why should we concern ourselves with psychological processes of the mythical average developer? The question is, whether this language is appealing to you.

I suppose if you're working on a small pet project that nobody else is going to see. If you're working on something with a bunch of other people you're likely to care more about what the mythical average dev thinks.