On 15 dec 2006, at 14.14, Neil Bartlett wrote:
...
The Haskell web server that Simon Peyton-Jones et al described in
their
paper would be a great example. But where's the download? How do I
get a
copy to play with? In the real world, things don't stop with the
publication of a paper ;-)
I think this hits the nail on the head.
To be blunt, the presence of so many academics and scientists in the
Haskell community is intimidating to those of us that work in industry.
Our brains are, after all, not as highly trained as yours, and we care
about different things than you do.
Now I
The front end for the comeau compiler is from Edison Design Group, and
that's the one that is used by many other compilers. And the EDG
compiler is regarded as being the most conformant.
Besides MS and the FSF (visual c++ and gcc), both Sun and IBM have c++
compiler toolchains not based on EDG.
Hello!
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 01:14:38PM -, Neil Bartlett wrote:
Just that it would be great to hear more about the mundane
aspects of programming occasionally. Like, how exactly do I read from a
relational database with Haskell? Or process an XML file? Or build an
event-driven GUI? And
On 12/15/06, Tomasz Zielonka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Haskell web server that Simon Peyton-Jones et al described in their
paper would be a great example. But where's the download?
Let me stress this: HWS is an *exception*. It's the only Haskell related
thing that I had trouble to find.
On 12/15/06, Jason Dagit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/15/06, Tomasz Zielonka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Haskell web server that Simon Peyton-Jones et al described in
their
paper would be a great example. But where's the download?
Let me stress this: HWS is an *exception*. It's the
Hi,
I don't answer specific previous line of mail but just give my opinion :)
As with any non-mainstream or young language, there's some kind of
lack of libraries/tools/whatever. With the arrival of Java, people get
used to have scores of libraries which are 'right there', just 'part'
of the
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 09:21:52AM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote:
On 12/15/06, Tomasz Zielonka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Haskell web server that Simon Peyton-Jones et al described in their
paper would be a great example. But where's the download?
Let me stress this: HWS is an *exception*.
This is sort of a tangent...
One of the things I notice happens a lot on the lists is that it is very
difficult to answer questions without knowing the background of the
person asking it.
Haskell is a 'multi-level' language in a lot of ways, there is the nice
friendly veneer described in the
The core of the 'Blub Paradox'.
There is almost no upside for a manager to approve an 'unusual'
language for a project. Most technology changes are driven by
engineers, and most engineers are by nature risk averse, even though
they also tend to be neophiles.
So, on a given project, they'll try
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, John Meacham wrote:
One of the things I notice happens a lot on the lists is that it is very
difficult to answer questions without knowing the background of the
person asking it.
snip
Perhaps we as a community need to avoid the urge (it is hard to resist)
to give
Yes! You are right commercials benefits from academics; NO DOUBT!
No one will discuss anything against that because that's obvious where is
the source. But It is not obvious where is the destination. Maybe new-comers
need to be more Haskellized first. But that's not the problem. In this
thread
I have been keeping up with this thread. As a user of Haskell for
comercial purposes, I can say that it does what I want. The only
thing currently on my wish-list is some sort of run time debuging.
(sometimes you want to know how you got to the empty list that you
took the head of :) Anyhow, I
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 03:03:51AM -0500, Mark Goldman wrote:
I have been keeping up with this thread. As a user of Haskell for
comercial purposes, I can say that it does what I want. The only
thing currently on my wish-list is some sort of run time debuging.
(sometimes you want to know how
I think this is going out of the way. Excuse me, but the main discussion was
not about pascal!
And thanks again to all. Now I think there is a bigger whole between current
situation of Haskell and using It as a real tool, than what I thought
before.
But any way; I still have a hope for rising a
On 12/13/06, Kaveh Shahbazian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this is going out of the way. Excuse me, but the main discussion was
not about pascal!
This list is exactly for off-topic discussions :-)
And thanks again to all. Now I think there is a bigger whole between current
situation of
Hello Kirsten,
Tuesday, December 12, 2006, 4:28:18 PM, you wrote:
Actually, the more I think of it, the more I think we should rename
the language altogether.
Curry would have avoided this problem.
we can also rename Pascal to Blez to avoid confusion
--
Best regards,
Bulat
Bulat Ziganshin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
one particular thing that we still lack is something like book
Haskell in real world
How about:
The reason why Haskell is academic-centric is that it was originally
conceived by academics, and they were interested in doing research
into language design and implementation ..
shouldn't we make this used to be academic-centric?
People outside academia who might be inclined to take on some
Hallo,
On 12/13/06, Claus Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we have had lots of languages that were intended to be well-designed
(good, beautiful, ..), but never much used in practice, and we have also
had lots of languages that were intended to be pragmatic (practical,
useful, ..), without much
On 12/13/06, Claus Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason why Haskell is academic-centric is that it was originally
conceived by academics, and they were interested in doing research
into language design and implementation ..
shouldn't we make this used to be academic-centric?
I think
Hello Alex,
Wednesday, December 13, 2006, 8:01:07 PM, you wrote:
mailing list, and the usual answer is why?. The authors claim that
when thinking about a new version of Lua they don't think of features
to add, but what features they can remove.
Newspeak is the only language that is
Hello Malcolm,
Wednesday, December 13, 2006, 6:53:56 PM, you wrote:
one particular thing that we still lack is something like book
Haskell in real world
How about:
Applications of Functional Programming (Hardcover)
by Colin Runciman (Editor), David Wakeling (Editor)
well, if Sun hadn't have released a version of smalltalk with a funny
c like syntax, you might have seen some interesting developments in
the mid 90's
On 12/13/06, Claus Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason why Haskell is academic-centric is that it was originally
conceived by
well, if Sun hadn't have released a version of smalltalk with a funny
c like syntax, you might have seen some interesting developments in
the mid 90's
yes, perhaps. but now that funny smalltalk is open source, the self
team has been released from indenture (after Scheme and Self
people, Sun is
Thanks again.
Look all. When I (and I think everybody here) make a discussion about
Haskell, It is not about to dominating anyone('s opinions) or attacking to
Haskell (for Haskell evangelists!); Haskell is great enough that surely will
lead - if not be - the next picture for meaning of SOFTWARE
On 12/12/06, Kaveh Shahbazian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you still want to pay your developers for checking NULL values,
correctness of INTERFACES, writing IF ELSE and SELECT CASEs full of
side effect and junks (Something that can be simply implemented by Pattern
Matching), continuing OO world
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 10:58:18AM +, Kirsten Chevalier wrote:
Functional programming people have a reputation for arrogance --
whether that impression is fair or not and whether that arrogance is
merited or not, the impression exists, and some people find it a
turn-off.
Aren't you
On 12/12/06, Tomasz Zielonka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 10:58:18AM +, Kirsten Chevalier wrote:
Functional programming people have a reputation for arrogance --
whether that impression is fair or not and whether that arrogance is
merited or not, the impression exists,
Hi
That's exactly the problem! For most people there *is* no difference.
You say functional programming to most people, even professional
programmers, and usually the only chance you have of getting them to
understand what what you mean is by asking so, have you heard of
Lisp, or Scheme?
On 12/12/06, Neil Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Haskell is just too similar to Pascal.
That statement sounds very wrong to me :-)
--
Sebastian Sylvan
+46(0)736-818655
UIN: 44640862
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
ndmitchell:
Hi
That's exactly the problem! For most people there *is* no difference.
You say functional programming to most people, even professional
programmers, and usually the only chance you have of getting them to
understand what what you mean is by asking so, have you heard of
Lisp,
On 12/12/06, Donald Bruce Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-- Don If it ain't pure, it ain't functional Stewart
flame-bait
Oh, so you're saying that we should trademark the phrase functional
programming so that no language with uncontrolled side effects would
be allowed to use it?
/flame-bait
On 12/12/06, Brian Hulley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neil Mitchell wrote:
Maybe we
should try and hijack the phrase functional programming - Haskell is
just too similar to Pascal.
This reminds me of when I was getting an X-ray a few months ago and I struck
up a conversation with the
Hi,
Actually, the more I think of it, the more I think we should rename
the language altogether. It seems like people say Haskell with
stress on the first syllable if they were either on the committee or
learned it inside academia, and Haskell with stress on the second
syllable if they learned
Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
Who wants to join the Lisp is not functional programming movement with me?
Oh, lordy. As if the Scheme is not Lisp flames on comp.lang.lisp
weren't enough...
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
On 12/12/06, Andy Georges [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Actually, the more I think of it, the more I think we should rename
the language altogether. It seems like people say Haskell with
stress on the first syllable if they were either on the committee or
learned it inside academia, and
Maybe we can claim it should be 'has kell', where kell is something
cool, and no cornflakes. It has kell.
if there was an implementation of Haskell on Cell processors, it could
be has cell.. I wonder if knowing what people are going to do with
your name is sufficient to put students off
Claus Reinke wrote:
but on the Pascal note: is there anything in Pascal that Haskell doesn't
provide, and improves on (nested procedures, procedure parameters,
distinguishing in and out parameters, types, ..)?
Subrange types, maybe? But I'm sure Oleg will show us that Haskell
already has
On 12/12/06, Andreas Rossberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Claus Reinke wrote:
but on the Pascal note: is there anything in Pascal that Haskell doesn't
provide, and improves on (nested procedures, procedure parameters,
distinguishing in and out parameters, types, ..)?
Subrange types, maybe? But
On 12/12/06, Claus Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe we can claim it should be 'has kell', where kell is something
cool, and no cornflakes. It has kell.
if there was an implementation of Haskell on Cell processors, it could
be has cell..
Pronounced hassle? :-)
--
Sebastian Sylvan
(Even clean has a simple GUI. Is it that hard to
provide a simple GUI like that to be installed by default?)
Why not provide two, that can be installed? Gtk2Hs and wxHaskell. You
can bundle them by default, or download them, the difference is
minimal.
In my humble opinion, in this context,
Hello Nia,
Monday, December 11, 2006, 1:43:51 PM, you wrote:
since there are some implementation with graphic interface like Hugs. But
since Hugs is not a compiler but an interpreter, ones who are to develop
a real world application will hardly choose it.
i disagree. Hugs is very compatible
Hi Bulat.
Ones who can handle and compile with GHC won't feel anything absurd working
with a console, CLI environment. They won't regard the lack of GUI as a
problem. But Kaveh does. It doesn't make sense that there would be anyone
who first develop in Hugs(deliberately not GHCi since it has no
On 12/11/06, Nia Rium [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my humble opinion, in this context, GUI doesn't mean a library to
implement a GUI application. It rather means an interpreter/compiler that
provides graphical interface.
Windows users can use Visual Haskell...
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You
On 12/11/06, Philippa Cowderoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only those who already have Visual Studio, no?
Yes, that is an unfortunate limitation.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't prove anything.
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
___
Haskell-Cafe
Taral wrote:
On 12/11/06, Nia Rium [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my humble opinion, in this context, GUI doesn't mean a library to
implement a GUI application. It rather means an interpreter/compiler
that
provides graphical interface.
Windows users can use Visual Haskell...
It's still in an
Hi,
one particular thing that we still lack is something like book
Haskell in
real world
We need a 'Dive into Haskell' book.
-- Andy
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
48 matches
Mail list logo
