David Bergman writes: >Should I imply that the IO monad is "pretty damned useless" in Hugs >then, since the loop does not run in constant space there?
my statement was too broad. allow me to amend it. some are using Haskell for "systems programming", as a better C than C. some, including me, would like to see more of that, with Haskell or another pure functional language with an IO monad taking systems programmers away from the C and C++ communities. Hugs is completely useless for *that*. for an example of Haskell as a better C than C, see Chak's Gtk+ bindings. to use them you must write your whole GUI in the IO monad in a style where the basic data structures and control structures closely resemble what you would write in C. see http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~chak/haskell/gtk/BoolEd.html and note how most of the functions are in the IO monad. many Haskellers have a negative opinion of such heavy use of the IO monad, but in systems programming you need more control over when (relative to other interactions) your program performs an interaction with a file, network or UI resource than is available in Haskell without the IO monad. -- Richard Uhtenwoldt "It's a mammal thing; you wouldn't understand." _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell