[Haskell Cafe] strict version of Haskell - does it exist?

Is there any document describing why there is no ghc --strict flag making all code strict by default? Wouldn't such a '--strict' flag turn Haskell/GHC into a better C/gcc compiler?
I agree that a strict flag would turn Haskell into C--but that's a perversion of Haskell. Almost all Haskell code I write depends critically on laziness. Sure, there are little bits here and there that would run faster if I carefully decorated them with strict flags. But the genius of Haskell is architectural clarity, achieved in no small part by relegating nasty issues of sequencing to the implementation. If you even have to think once about what needs to be strict or non-strict, then non-strict is the only viable default. I can't imagine writing any interesting Haskell code that will successfully run all strict. Doug McIlroy

On 31/01/2012, at 5:47 AM, Doug McIlroy wrote:
Is there any document describing why there is no ghc --strict flag making all code strict by default? Wouldn't such a '--strict' flag turn Haskell/GHC into a better C/gcc compiler?
I agree that a strict flag would turn Haskell into C--but that's a perversion of Haskell.
On the other hand, a designed-to-be-strict language-and-libraries with close-to-Haskell *syntax* would be nice. I recently described F# as combining the beauty of Caml with the functional purity of C# -- both of course are like the snakes of Ireland.

Quoth "Richard O'Keefe"
On the other hand, a designed-to-be-strict language-and-libraries with close-to-Haskell *syntax* would be nice. I recently described F# as combining the beauty of Caml with the functional purity of C# -- both of course are like the snakes of Ireland.
Ouch, the beauty of Caml, tsk. I guess it may not have been a very lively project of late, but the Timber language, a descendant of O'Haskell, is supposed to be strict, I suppose because they were using it in real time controllers. Donn

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 2:51 AM, Richard O'Keefe
On the other hand, a designed-to-be-strict language-and-libraries with close-to-Haskell *syntax* would be nice. I recently described F# as combining the beauty of Caml with the functional purity of C# -- both of course are like the snakes of Ireland.
It's been mentioned, but: http://disciple.ouroborus.net/ (sorry, forgot reply-all)
participants (4)
-
Donn Cave
-
Doug McIlroy
-
Gábor Lehel
-
Richard O'Keefe