Redirecting to haskell-cafe@, where this kind of long discussion belongs.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Colin Adams
colinpaulad...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 18 April 2011 16:54, Ertugrul Soeylemez e...@ertes.de wrote:
Well, *someone* has to worry about robustness and scalability. Users
notice when their two minute system builds start taking four minutes
(and will be at my door wanting me to fix it) because something didn't
scale fast enough, or have to be run more than once because a failing
component build wasn't restarted properly. I'm willing to believe that
haskell lets you write more scalable code than C, but C's tools for
handling concurrency suck, so that should be true in any language
where someone actually thought about dealing with concurrency beyond
locks and protected methods. The problem is, the only language I've
found where that's true that *also* has reasonable tools to deal with
scaling beyond a single system is Eiffel (which apparently abstracts
things even further than haskell - details like how concurrency is
achieved or how many concurrent operations you can have are configured
when you start an application, *not* when writing it). Unfortunately,
Eiffel has other problems that make it undesirable.
I can't make a comparison, because I don't know Eiffel.
I do, and I don't recognize what the OP is referring to - I suspect he meant
Erlang.
--
Colin Adams
Preston, Lancashire, ENGLAND
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
___
Haskell mailing list
hask...@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe