On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Donn Cave
I don't care about whether Python had any influence, but I'd sure like to stamp out the "scripting language" rumor.
You all are talking about calling Haskell a scripting language like it's a bad thing. Coming from a Perl background, I learned that when a culture made stuck-up claims about its language being a "real" programming language, what it meant was that it would be verbose, dry, and no fun. To us, scripting meant short, potent code that rolled off your fingers and into the computers mind, compelling it to do your job with reverence to the super power you truly are. Programming meant a system with 100,000 lines of boring code that reinvents a broken dialect of LISP because it was too rigid to get the job done naturally. I also have a C++ background and a C# foreground. This large, inert culture views Programs with a capital P as large, complete tools like Photoshop (also with a capital P). Their #1 stigma against scripting languages is that they are too slow to do real work. Also they "don't scale well", which I guess means that they don't make it inconvenient to design badly. Haskell is a language in which it is possible to write short, potent code (I use it at the command line). It is fast enough to do real work. It is inconvenient to design badly. It is fun. It is also dry sometimes. "Scripting language" strikes me as one of those terms that is used in heated arguments despite having no meaning (meaningless terms seem to proliferate as the heat is turned up). I dunno, I just don't think it is a big deal. Everybody seems to be calling Haskell a "DSL-writing language", but that can just as easily be taken as a point for and against it. If people find Haskell useful for scripting, then it is a scripting language. No need to be offended. Luke