At Sat, 31 Jan 2015 13:22:09 +0100, Ertugrul Söylemez wrote: > [...] > I have actually experimented with using Haskell (and a few other FP > languages) as a substitute for shells. > [...] > You might be interested why Curry didn't work. Simple: I couldn't figure > out how to write a program. Actually I went through the whole tutorial, did > all the exercises (they aren't really difficult to a Haskell programmer) and > then skimmed through the whole PAKCS manual. I could write extremely > elegant algorithmic code and was quite amazed at the beauty of this > language, even compared to Haskell. But in the end I still didn't know how > to turn all this beautiful Curry code into an executable file that I can run > without invoking PAKCS explicitly. Something with a shebang or ideally > something binary. It would probably be possible to write wrapper scripts, > but let's just wait until one of the implementations becomes mature enough > for systems programming.
Curry is indeed a beautiful language, and is essentially a conservative extension of Haskell. I am surprised that more Haskell folk have not adopted it. PAKCS compiles Curry to Prolog (typically SICStus), which drags in the Prolog system. To get a binary executable, a better choice would be MCC (compiles Curry to native code) or KiCS2 (compiles Curry to Haskell, which can go into ghc): http://www-ps.informatik.uni-kiel.de/currywiki/implementations/overview Tim _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
