On 11/21/08, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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 >
what about nhc98? -- http://www.fernski.com
