Reminds me of a song, "I'm dreaming of a ... dotnet Haskell..." I find it such a petty no real work seems to be done on that. Okay, the performance might not be optimal. Okay, you might have two huge frameworks that overlap. Okay, using the .NET stuff would mean some kind of automatic IO monadic wrapper generator, but surely with the .NET reflection support, this would be possible. But look at the advantages... Of course Haskell is a research language, and "avoid success at all cost" is the goal. But unfortunately, IMHO Haskell does make a lot of sense, so... Ah well, I should stop nagging about this :-) Jonathan Cast wrote:

On 17 Jan 2008, at 7:02 PM, Don Stewart wrote:

...

http://cs.hubfs.net/blogs/hell_is_other_languages/archive/2008/01/16/4565.as...

I imagine this can only ease the process of learning Haskell, and broaden the base of possible Haskellers, as more people on using .NET stuff become familiar with modern typed FP.

Indeed, these days I think the main advantage of Haskell is not the feature set (the same features can be used nicely in Perl (well, nicely for Perl), or not-so-nicely in Python), but rather, the fact that Haskell is *designed* for such things, so it's syntax makes things that are verbose in Perl or Python natural.

jcc

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 00:39 -0600, Derek Elkins wrote:

On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 07:32 +0100, Peter Verswyvelen wrote:

...

Reminds me of a song, "I'm dreaming of a ... dotnet Haskell..."

I find it such a petty no real work seems to be done on that.

No one is stopping you.

Well yes, lack of time and knowledge :-) And oh yeah, I also forget my RSI ;-)

apfelmus writes:

...

I imagine this can only ease the process of learning Haskell, and broaden the base of possible Haskellers, as more people on using .NET stuff become familiar with modern typed FP.

There's a reason the STM monad hatched in Haskell: how does the above STM in F# handle side-effects like launchMissile ?

If you read the comments at the bottom, it seems it does not. Expect an arbitrary number of missiles (although the final effect of destroying the target city will perhaps be the same). -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants

B-but, (and here's the ironic part), launchMissile is only idempotent it the missile is atomic. --S 2008/1/18 Brent Yorgey :

On Jan 18, 2008 4:59 AM, Ketil Malde wrote:

...

apfelmus writes:

...

...

I imagine this can only ease the process of learning Haskell, and broaden the base of possible Haskellers, as more people on using .NET stuff become familiar with modern typed FP.

...

There's a reason the STM monad hatched in Haskell: how does the above STM in F# handle side-effects like launchMissile ?

If you read the comments at the bottom, it seems it does not. Expect an arbitrary number of missiles (although the final effect of destroying the target city will perhaps be the same).

That's only because launchMissile is idempotent.

-Brent

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe