Re: [Haskell-cafe] I read somewhere that for 90% of a wide class of computing problems, you only need 10% of the source code in Haskell, that you would in an imperative language.

On Oct 1, 2009, at 9:26 PM, Andrew Coppin wrote:

It might be a better argument to say that human thinking is fundamentally sequential; parallel computers have been around for a little while now...

You've never been talking on the phone while stirring a pot with one hand and wiping down a child with the other? You've never read (part of) a book while watching a TV program and been able to summarize both afterwards? You've never played the piano while talking about something else? Human *verbalisation* is fundamental, human *thinking* is not. (It's not unboundedly parallel either.)