Functional Programming tutorial claims all basic OCaml types are unboxed. about v2.ocaml.org HOT 2 OPEN

Overall, I think that all tutorials would need to be edited. Another piece from the label tutorial:

When and when not to use ~ and ?

The syntax for labels and optional arguments is confusing, and you may often wonder when to use ~foo, when to use ?foo and when to use plain foo. It's something of a black art which takes practice to get right.

I cannot disagree more with the use of black art to try to instill a false sense of familiarity with the reader, at the price of sending a terrible and inaccurate message.

from v2.ocaml.org.

Hi @ninjaaron thanks for the feedback.

I completely agree, the phrase basic types is ambiguous (at least in this tutorial's context) and most I assume would be thinking of "basic data types" in the manual (see https://ocaml.org/releases/4.12/htmlman/coreexamples.html#s:datatypes), where using that definition this statement is indeed incorrect. Perhaps it would be better with a small explanation and then a link to https://ocaml.org/releases/4.12/htmlman/intfc.html#s:c-ocaml-datatype-repr ?

This is the second time in not so long that this tutorial seems to be incorrect/misleading (see ocaml/ocaml.org#1595) and I agree with @Octachron that overall the tone of the tutorial is not great. I'm wondering if it is causing more harm than good at this point?

from v2.ocaml.org.