5 Apr
2010
5 Apr
'10
7:05 p.m.
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Jacques Carette
Don Stewart wrote:
I think we don't see as much metaprogramming because of other language features -- laziness, operator syntax, and type classes -- make a bunch of common designs work without needing metaprogramming.
While true, there are also 2 other reasons for meta-programmers are not all over Haskell: 1. efficiency nuts are already using C++ templates and don't see why they would switch, 2. people who care about types use a typed meta-language (like metaocaml) instead of an untyped template layer atop a (fantastic!) typed language.
Are you implying that template haskell is not typed? Jason