Well for instance in game development we cover a number of different computational and creative roles. Being able to design languages that serve game development easily is a plus, or creating a solid backend infrastructure. The general tool is often a poor fit.
And sometimes computational systems just have to be extremely efficient, especially on lowest common denominator targets. This is another good place for a DSL or some sort of automatic code generation, in which case Haskell can become like lisp on steroids for spitting out code consumed elsewhere.
Cheers,
Darren
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 01:35:20AM +0200, Darren Grant wrote:
> Magnus, did you notice the Alan Kay quote that was generated for your sig?
> Serendipitous. :-)
Well spotted, I didn't notice it. Serendipitous indeed!
> Haskell subsumes a great deal of semantics from many programming
> models. This is not to say that it is necessarily a productive
> end-tool replacement, but many have discovered that it is a great
> language to build such tools with.
I'm convinced it IS a productive replacement in a surprising number of
cases. It's just so irritating how entrenched the use of C/C++ is in
the circles I move :(
/M
--
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus
I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have
C++ in mind.
-- Alan Kay