Thank you for your advice, Actually, I'm not comfortable with C# at all... I'm gonna be learning it as I develop the application.
> Also helpful are various Haskell-inspired features added to C# in the > last few years, making it feasible to port a large subset of Haskell > to C# fairly directly. What kind of features are those you mention? I'd like to know in advance in order to search them before I start to do anything, even if I'm not going to use Haskell, knowing those features might help me to get a high level of abstraction in C# (or not). On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:46 PM, C. McCann <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Hector Guilarte <[email protected]> > wrote: > > If somebody can point out really good reasons on why I should use Haskell > to > > do my work, please let me know them, they might help me convincing my > > bosses. On the other hand, if you believe Haskell is a bad language for > this > > kind of task, and why C# or any other .NET language would be better, I'm > > welcome to hear your reasons, they might convince me. > > Well, how comfortable are you with Haskell? If you're roughly as > proficient in it as you are in C#, you could probably bang out a > prototype using Haskell in a fraction of the time with fewer bugs. > Most software projects get massively revised from the initial version > anyway, so using a more productive language and then rewriting for the > production version can still be a net win, especially since you can > use the prototype as a specification or reference implementation > (e.g., you get some QA for free by running the two on identical input > and checking for identical output). And of course, maintenance and > scalability don't matter in a prototype. > > If it goes well, you'll have proven that Haskell has value (without > forcing a long-term, up-front commitment to it), probably improved the > quality of the C# version, and gotten the chance to write Haskell at > work. > > Furthermore, in this particular case, you say it's a mapper between > data description languages. While I obviously don't know the details, > applying transformations to complex, easily-inspected data structures > is a classic example of a problem ideally suited to a functional > language with pattern matching, be it Haskell, F#, or any other > ML-influenced language--thus making Haskell even more advantageous for > rapid prototyping. > > Also helpful are various Haskell-inspired features added to C# in the > last few years, making it feasible to port a large subset of Haskell > to C# fairly directly. > > - C. >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
