Hello Mauricio, Tuesday, November 11, 2008, 2:26:21 PM, you wrote:
imho, Haskell isn't worse here than any other compiled language - C++, ML, Eiffel and beter tnan Java or C#.every language has its own object model and GC. the only ay is to provide C-typed interfaces between languages (or use COM, IDL and other API-describing languages) > I think Haskell is not nice to write general purpouse libraries > that could be easily and completly wrapped by other languages. > You can wrap gtk, sqlite3, gsl, opengl etc., but you can't write > python bindings for Data.Graph. > But, then, if you claim there's nothing else Haskell can't do, > what do you need those bindings for ? :) > Best, > Mauricio >> Hi everyone >> >> So I should clarify I'm not a troll and do "see the Haskell light". But >> one thing I can never answer when preaching to others is "what does >> Haskell not do well?" >> >> Usually I'll avoid then question and explain that it is a 'complete' >> language and we do have more than enough libraries to make it useful and >> productive. But I'd be keen to know if people have any anecdotes, >> ideally ones which can subsequently be twisted into an argument for >> Haskell ;) >> >> Cheers, >> >> Dave > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe