On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Iruata Souza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:23 PM, matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>> > >>> Without starting a flame war, I'd like to know if some of you think it > >>> could > >>> be useful on a Plan 9 grid/environment. > >>> > >>> > > > > I've often though quite a few languages could be shrunken down fit with > > Plan9's diretory/files system. Python, for instance, would need much less > > code for networking etc. > > > > So a language that specialsed in I/O primitives would be a good choice. > That > > doesn't sound like Haskell to me. I/O is about changing state. That said, > > there must be a way to make it fit :) > > > > Of the few I have used, I think python is the best hybrid that fits. > > > > once in a while I play with fgb's port of tinyscheme and it seems to > fit for the pretty simple stuff I do. just for fun, I started adding > some Plan 9 native calls to tinyscheme and it worked nicely. > > iru > I've been doing a lot with both Haskell and Erlang these days... I'm also impressed by the rich Haskell library and that the binaries, even on linux, tend to only depend on libc once built for "deployment". Well that's true with GHC anyway, but porting GHC to Plan 9 might take a serious step back in time to bootstrap the C sources all the way back up to the current version. Dave
