Chicken or Scheme are not at all what at all what I was suggesting as they offer nothing in the way of purity or type-safety, which are the primary motivation for suggesting Haskell.
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Anderson Torres < [email protected]> wrote: > 2015-01-31 22:24 GMT-02:00 Ertugrul Söylemez <[email protected]>: > >> What about other languages as Python, Perl etc.? I know it is against > >> our purity standards, but they are a far superior to Bash scripting. > > > > Well, that's the current state of the art. They are both used in > > Nixpkgs and some Nix-related tools. They are an improvement over Bash > > scripting, but I believe we might as well go all the way and use a > > functional language. > > > > Also the Nix model allows us to compile all our scripts easily (just > > apply a function), which might hold some benefit in terms of startup and > > switch times. There is little reason to use interpreted scripts when > > you have a fast compiler. > > So, Chicken appears to be a good choice: it can be both interpreted > and compiled, very fast and with little overhead. And it can be easily > debugged - it's functional, after all! > I think Haskell is as much as overkiller - there is even a project > about it: Nix Evaluator in Haskell[1]. It is easier to use a less > ambitious and more funny language (in the Python sense of funny > programming). > > What about to start a project to implement Chicken as script > supporting language for Nix? I would like to help! > > 1 - http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/2014-July/013624.html > _______________________________________________ > nix-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
