Nick wrote: > The question is the following: how big the gap between strict languages > with lazy constructs and Haskell? Does the default lazyness have > irrefutable advantage over default strictness?
Laziness is needed to achieve true compositionality. This point is elaborated in John Hughes. "Why functional programming matters" http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Research_papers#Overview I also think that the laziness in Haskell is already so implicit that 90% of the Haskell code written so far will simply break irreparably if you experimentally remove it. By the way, lazy evaluation is strictly more powerful than eager evaluation (in a pure language, that is) with respect to asymptotic complexity: Richard Bird, Geraint Jones and Oege de Moor. "More Haste, Less Speed." http://web.comlab.ox.ac.uk/oucl/work/geraint.jones/morehaste.html Regards, apfelmus _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
