On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 18:45:23 +0200, Jonathan Cast
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 27 Dec 2007, at 9:57 AM, Cristian Baboi wrote:
Good to know. I intended to use Haskell for algorithms, but it seems it
is not so good at them.
Very sad. The entire point of Haskell is that it allows the user to
transcend the algorithm as a way of expressing computations.
I hope someday you may understand Haskell, rather than just criticizing
it.
I'm begining to understand it. "Criticizing" it's just a tehnique to allow
me to understand it better.
This is what I understood:
- there is no distinction of data from functions. This seem more like a
matter of definiton: what I call X, the X + Y or just X.
- functions can be manipulated the same way as data. This does not sound
right.
- functions can be manipulated as easy as data. This seems better.
- functional programming is declarative. One may take a picture of all
those pebbles, but their arrangemant does not make sense to him because no
part of it resemble the original description.
- one cannot print "things" that cannot be traversed in a sequential way
The last two seems to be in contradiction.
________ Information from NOD32 ________
This message was checked by NOD32 Antivirus System for Linux Mail Servers.
part000.txt - is OK
http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
