Jonathan Cast writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... Why for goodness' sake, people interested in
Haskell *should* worry about parsing of Java bytecode chunks?
It depends on your reason for interest. A better question: why should
people interested in Java be interested in using Haskell to manipulate
it?
Because Haskell is (IMHO) the best pure data manipulation language
around (pure data, not pure manipulation). Really, all code-walkers
should be written in Haskell.
If you say so...
It is nice to be so categorical.
But not all people would dare...
Already source parsers in Haskell are not so straightforward. Monadic are
very nice. People teach compilation in such a way, (I did it myself but
I didn't care about efficiency). Swierstra et al. did a great job, but the
result is not easy to master.
So, in general, although I am on your side concerning the usage of Haskell,
I must say that I hate the philosophy "Eine Kirche, eine Sprache"...
If the context - as here - is often very <<stateful>>, we, the True
Functional Believers have no chance to convince people to use functional
languages, if they are used to other style of programming. That's why I
was surprised that somebody got surprised. There is no need to convince
people reading this list. Try to convince others...
Jerzy Karczmarczuk
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
