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.

1 Oct 2009


      On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:26 AM, 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...
Perhaps *conscious* human thinking is sequential — yet our brains are
massively parallel processors, and have been around for quite a long
time.  ;-)

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.

Tom Tobin