I'm not sure there's confluence if you factor in the resources required
for such reduction, though.
On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 10:47 +0200, DooMeeR wrote:
What are the advantages/disadvantages when comparing a fork to a spoon?
From Church's thesis, one can easily answer this question: they are
And Darcs the distributed revision control system.
Erik, Darcs is so slow, buggy and broken by design (I speak for direct
experience) that even the GHC team decided to switch to GIT or
Mercurial, see [1] and [2].
Consider this: three years ago I decided to study a functional
language and I had
On Thursday 14 August 2008 03:46:10 David Thomas wrote:
--- On Wed, 8/13/08, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I consider them all to be untested because nobody has ever done anything
significant using Haskell AFAIK.
Besides the window manager I'm currently using... :-P
Interestingly,
Thanks - nice summary
Dave M.
On 14/08/2008, blue storm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it seems the debate went on anyway. I had written something, but when
just before posting i saw Brian Hurt's post, and decided not to. It now
seems i was wrong, and actually (when reading the others) my post
Well said Brian.
Any tutorial is good enough at underlining respective language features.
Haskell has lazy evaluation, Caml has strict evaluation, don't pretend it's a
secret and don't ask whether good or bad.
Be responsible, try it yourself if needed, then choose yourself.
- damien
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 02:57:47PM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
and Haskell is faster than most (scripting) languages used these days
anyway).
Despite being written in Python, Mercurial is orders of magnitude faster than
Darcs.
(wow, very funny)
by the same stupid thinking process:
On Thursday 14 August 2008 15:21:40 you wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 02:57:47PM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
and Haskell is faster than most (scripting) languages used these days
anyway).
Despite being written in Python, Mercurial is orders of magnitude faster
than Darcs.
(wow, very
Jon Harrop wrote:
184,574: FFTW (14,298 lines of OCaml)
For FFTW, Ocaml is used the generate C code. Nothing that the final
user of libfftw links to is written in Ocaml. I don't think this one
really counts.
Some of the Haskell projects (e.g. pugs and srcinst) have even *decreased*
in
On Thursday 14 August 2008 21:57:59 you wrote:
Excerpts from Jon Harrop's message of Thu Aug 14 15:57:47 +0200 2008:
On Thursday 14 August 2008 12:50:43 blue storm wrote:
and Haskell is faster than most (scripting) languages used these days
anyway).
Despite being written in Python,
Excerpts from Jon Harrop's message of Thu Aug 14 23:16:26 +0200 2008:
On Thursday 14 August 2008 21:57:59 you wrote:
Excerpts from Jon Harrop's message of Thu Aug 14 15:57:47 +0200 2008:
On Thursday 14 August 2008 12:50:43 blue storm wrote:
and Haskell is faster than most (scripting)
On Thursday 14 August 2008 22:50:19 you wrote:
I'm talking about the informal algorithms, their independent of that kind
of things...
Yes, that may well be true. I think we would need in-depth knowledge of Darcs
to be able to distinguish between the two.
Do any OCaml projects use Darcs, BTW?
One is that Haskell forces your program into two parts. Parts that contain
side-effects (in monads) and the part that is pure.
You can actually do quite a bit more, using different monads to
compartementalize different aspects of your code. You will, by the
way, have noticed that Haskellers
What are the advantages/disadvantages when comparing OCaml to Haskell?
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list:
circ ular wrote:
What are the advantages/disadvantages when comparing OCaml to Haskell?
The biggest disadvantage of comparing Ocaml to Haskell would have to be
causing a long, pointless flamewar. Offhand, I can't think of an upside.
Brian
--- On Wed, 8/13/08, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I consider them all to be untested because nobody has ever done anything
significant using Haskell AFAIK.
Besides the window manager I'm currently using... :-P
___
Caml-list
David Thomas wrote:
--- On Wed, 8/13/08, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I consider them all to be untested because nobody has ever done anything
significant using Haskell AFAIK.
Besides the window manager I'm currently using... :-P
And Darcs the distributed revision control
16 matches
Mail list logo
