Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
> Christopher Smith wrote:
>> Frankly, by treating mutation as a special case, it puts the focus in
>> the right place, where most of the bugs come from, simplifies
>> concurrency, transactions, etc. It also allows you to do the kind of
>> transformations of functions that really end up being helpful.
>>
>> It does still have some rough edges, as the language still needs some
>> maturing, but there is nothing about it that makes it inherently bad
>> beyond programmers having difficulty with functional languages in
>> general.
> 
> I'm not convinced yet.  I keep watching Haskell, but it seems that quite
> a few people launch into a project using Haskell and then shift to
> something else after a bit because it winds up having a touch too much
> friction.  A good example is:
> 
> http://wagerlabs.com/2006/01/01/haskell-vs-erlang-reloaded

I remember reading this when it first came out. I think in a lot of ways
this guy wasn't comfortable with the Haskell paradigm. He seemed to be
wanting a dynamically typed language, and as long as you are looking at
the problem that way, a statically typed language is gonna hurt you bad.
 He also had problems with memory consumption which tends to go better
with a) newer versions of GHC and b) programming Haskell "the Haskell
Way". I have observed on many occasions that when things weren't
efficient in Haskell it was because I was formulating my code the wrong
way. Same point goes for his problems with serialization.

>>>> Followed by Erlang.
>>> I just wish it had a JVM-based version.  It would give me a lot more
>>> confidence in its long term prospects.
>>
>> JVM's have their own issues with concurrency. ;-) I'll go with Erlang's
>> runtime.
> 
> I'd rather have *both*.

My point is that there is a fair bit of impedance mismatch between
Erlang's runtime model and the JVM's, particularly when it comes to
concurrency. Believe it or not the JVM is even more troublesome than the
standard POSIX runtime.

--Chris

-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg

Reply via email to