On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Fernan Bolando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> 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 > Honestly I hadn't thought about that one too much, but I think that that'd be fun to try.
