15 Jul
2015
15 Jul
'15
6:52 p.m.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:55:01AM -0600, John A. De Goes wrote:
If you’re not too picky about the ML, I’d suggest a better path is contributing to PureScript on the JVM (either that project or another one). PureScript’s semantics map cleanly to the JVM’s and very good native interop is possible; in addition, the PureScript compiler is designed for compiling to different backends (i.e. it has no runtime and will necessarily utilize the target’s native runtime environment).
Could you explain why PureScript is easier to port to the JVM? In particular I don't understand why its "semantics map cleanly to the JVM’s" but Haskell's don't. Tom