Which leads to the design of modular implicits, where you can bring other definitions into scope. This design I’ve critiqued earlier, based on experience with Scala (though Scala’s implicits is a bit different from modular implicits in its details).
I still see the resulting problem of there being invisible ‘holes’ in the code to be filled out as a big problem for readability (even though several instances can’t be in scope at the same time) - which goes directly against what (that has also been mentioned here) I see as a major advantage of OCaml over other languages; simplicity and readability.
As has also been mentioned in other threads (and earlier in this thread) - it’s possible to get several of the niceties of implicits via other features.
OCaml should not try to copy other hyped languages just to copy them; keep the identity and advantages of the language in sight.