I'm still sort of a beginner with Haskell, but ere are my thoughts. In the
sense you mean it, yes Haskell could be considered inflexible because it
makes it easier to implement a functional design and harder to implement an
imperative design. But if I were to go back to Java now, I would find it
very inflexible because it makes it very difficult to functional design, and
very easy to do imperative design. I would miss features like functors,
monads, and lazy evaluation.
On 18 May 2010 01:22, aditya siram
Haskell is considered by many as an inflexible language [1] . I describe a flexible language as one that supports any design you want (even a bad one) - if you can think it, you can code it and run it (bugs and all).
I share this opinion about Haskell but pursue it because I feel that one day it will open up and let me think more about the problem and less about how to get GHC to approve it.
So I guess the question to you practitioners is: Would you agree that it is a rigid language as describe in the link below, or is that just an illusion that goes away with experience?
-deech
[1] http://therighttool.hammerprinciple.com/statements/this-language-has-a-very-... _______________________________________________ Beginners mailing list Beginners@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners