I've heard complaints about the unsuitability of the Java VM for lazy functional languages. I wonder if the CLR also has issues for this?
The CLR has some technical features that make it more attractive than
the JVM, e.g. pointer-based unsafe code (useful for some closure
representations), tailcalls, generics, light-weight code generation (the
latter can be used for mixed interpretation/compilation with code
reclamation).
But in the end it will depends on what your goals are - you will
probably take a performance hit, but you will get a lot of benefits,
e.g. loads of great libraries and tools. I think a variant of Haskell
could find a niche in the context of either Java or .NET.
Cheers
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org
[mailto:haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Ashley Yakeley
Sent: 04 January 2005 01:14
To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Subject: [Haskell-cafe] Re: GHC for .NET?
In article
<5DCA48FADB33FF4D8C32A164DF24F2B0023C12C0@EUR-MSG-03.europe.corp.microso
ft.com>,
"Don Syme"
We still frequently talk about doing either Haskell.NET or a strict language much closer to Haskell (perhaps as a stepping stone to doing Haskell). But neither are currently active projects.
I've heard complaints about the unsuitability of the Java VM for lazy functional languages. I wonder if the CLR also has issues for this? -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe