On 10/07/07, Alex Queiroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hallo,On 7/10/07, Sebastian Sylvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That might eliminate the concurrency imperative (for a while!), but it > doesn't adress the productivity point. My hypothesis is this: People > don't like using unproductive tools, and if they don't have to, they > won't. > So you think we use C because we like it? :-) When this revolutionary tool of yours arrive that compiles Haskell to PIC devices, I'm gonna be the first to use it.
No, you use it because you have to, there is very little choice. Which is exactly my point. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that when nobody uses C for desktop applications, games etc. anymore because there's a better language available and widely supported, that some version of this "next mainstream language" will make it onto embedded devices too. The revolution (tm) won't come at the same time for all domains. C is probably used/supported in embedded devices mostly because it's popular for non-embedded devices (not because C is somehow uniquely suited for embedded devices). So what happens when something else is popular, when most industries have stopped using C and almost nobody coming from university knows it very well or at all? Isn't it likely that a lot of vendors will write compilers targeting embedded devices for this new popular language? -- Sebastian Sylvan +44(0)7857-300802 UIN: 44640862 _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
