G'day all. Quoting wren ng thornton <w...@freegeek.org>:
Sometimes in Haskell I've thought about how uniqueness typing would make something faster, but in general all the plumbing associated with it in Clean makes me feel like I'm writing systems-level code (i.e. C, asm) instead of using a high-level language. The extra plumbing really makes it feel dirtier to work with. That doesn't mean Clean is bad, but I think it does contribute to the "cluttered" feeling Haskellers get.
I think you're right here. Haskell has developed something of an aversion to naming things that aren't important enough to have a name, such as variables whose only reason to exist is "plumbing". We'd far rather spend effort on more higher-order functions, monads, combinators and points-freeness than name something that's unimportant. And the funny thing about this is that it usually works, because in Haskell, abstraction is cheap. I believe that this is the main reason why Haskell programmers haven't embraced arrows, despite their theoretical advantages: Every notation that has been implemented so far requires names for things that shouldn't need names.
But as I said, it's a silly argument and folks should use whichever gives them warm fuzzies.
I'd like to think that professional developers are a bit more scientific than this. Cheers, Andrew Bromage _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
