Yes, but from what I've seen, many OO patterns in F# are actually a good deal more verbose than they are in C# (whereas the reverse is true for functional patterns). And writing procedural/imperative-style logic in F# feels like it's fighting against what the language was designed for.
Don Syme makes a distinction between OOP and "object programming" various places on the internet. Object programming is quite natural in F#; possibly even moreso than in C#. And it's certainly not more verbose in F#.
That's what I meant by "OO services" in original comment: a class (or composition of classes) that maintains some state e.g. a connection, maybe some cached data or whatever, and wraps some third party services or DB calls, etc, and optionally create an interface it implements, for IoC and/or unit testing. This works quite well in F#. F#'s anonymous classes are a great conciseness aid there too (C#'s aren't sufficient; they're really just anonymous records).
It's just all the class inheritance hierarchy stuff that is uglier in F#.
> It's just all the class inheritance hierarchy stuff that is uglier in F#.
Yes, and that makes it harder for F# code to effectively re-use existing C# libraries. I know it is _possible_, fsc can reference DLLs no problem but unless that code was written to be idiomatic F# then I will have to awkwardly write some classes with a worse syntax than C#.
