Re: [Haskell-cafe] Haskell not ready for Foo [was: Re: Hypothetical Haskell job in New York]

Take, for example, RabbitMQ. There's nothing even remotely close in Haskell-land. RabbitMQ is written in 100% Erlang. It's built on Open Telecom Platform, which again is without equal in Haskell. There are a lot of theoretical reasons why Haskell would be a good choice to build libraries such as these, but lacking any production implementations, it's all just theory. Regards, John On Jan 8, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Creighton Hogg wrote:

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:32 AM, John A. De Goes wrote:

...

Haskell's networking support is very rudimentary. Erlang's is quite sophisticated. For network intensive applications, especially those requiring messaging, fault-tolerance, distribution, and so forth, there's no doubt that Erlang is a more productive choice.

Not because of the language, per se, but because of all the stuff that is packaged with it, or available for it.

Now I understand that there aren't(?) any Haskell implementations that can act as distributed nodes the way the Erlang implementation can, but I'm not familiar enough with Erlang to understand what it has for networking that the Haskell network packages don't have. Could you explain a bit further? I've been thinking a lot about network programming anyway lately & am looking for library opportunities.