On Tuesday 01 February 2011 12:27:32 bearophile wrote: > Walter: > > It's exponentially bad performance makes it short, not useful. > > A program with high complexity is not a problem if you run it only on few > very short examples. There is a place to care for performance (like when > you design a function for Phobos) and there are places where you care for > other things. > > I suggest top stop focusing only on a fault of a program that was not > designed for performance (and if you want to start looking at the numerous > good things present in Haskell. Haskell language and its implementation > contains tens of good ideas).
The issue is that if you want something in Phobos, it _does_ need to be designed with performance in mind. Anything which isn't efficient needs to have a very good reason for its existence which balances out its lack of efficiency. If the Haskell implementation isn't performant enough, then it doesn't cut it for Phobos, even if it's a good fit for Haskell. - Jonathan M Davis
