Oops, you're right.  It's not pure.  Mea cupla for not reading more closely.  I wonder how it deals with I/O, then?  I don't see anything like Haskell's monads or Clean's uniqueness typing...  but at a closer look it does appear to have an excellent Java FFI.

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Chris Eidhof <chris@eidhof.nl> wrote:
I don't think it's pure. I would definitely use a pure language on the JVM, but IIRC Open Quark / Cal is an impure language. For example, from the library documentation: "printLine :: String -> ()".

-chris

On 9 feb 2010, at 15:31, Tim Wawrzynczak wrote:

> Perhaps this is similar to what you're looking for.
>
> http://openquark.org/Open_Quark/Welcome.html
>
> It's a pure, lazy language for the JVM.  I haven't used it myself, but I would imagine that
> it would have a Java FFI.
>
> Cheers,
>  - Tim
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Tony Morris <tonymorris@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have hypothesised a pure, lazy language on the JVM and perhaps the
> .NET CLR with FFI to .NET/Java libraries. I foresee various problems but
> none that are catastrophic; just often requiring a compromises,
> sometimes very unattractive compromises. I have authored several
> libraries in the same vain as pure, lazy programming to run on the JVM
> in Java and Scala programming languages.
>
> I expect others have forethought and perhaps even experimented with such
> a language. Are there any dangers to be wary of that undo the entire
> endeavour?
>
> Thanks for any insights.
>
> --
> Tony Morris
> http://tmorris.net/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe