Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
Dave Feustel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A serious omission in Haskell tutorials is a collection of examples of how to write Haskell solutions for problems that would use arrays in any imperative language. I see that arrays can be defined in Haskell, but I don't see their use as computationally efficient in Haskell. By replacing the string type with our ByteString representation, Haskell is able to approach the speed of C, while still retaining the elegance of the idiomatic implementation. With stream fusion enabled, it actually beats the original C program. Only by sacrificing clarity and explicitly manipulating mutable blocks is the C program able to outperform Haskell. - http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/papers/CSL06.html The ability to fuse all common list functions allows the programmer to write in an elegant declarative style, and still produce excellent low level code. We can finally write the code we *want* to be able to write without sacrificing performance! - http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/papers/CLS07.html Don't give up. ;-) -vvv ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
kynn wrote: (I don't need elegant factorial or Fibonacci functions in my everyday work.) I think you do. Most of your utility programs probably fit into the simple frame of main = interact $ unlines . map f . lines for suitable f. Of course, f is hardly ever the factorial function, but it is a function. My guess is, you think you just wanted a loop when in reality you need to lift a function to work over a list. Or I can always wait until I retire; then I'll probably have a sufficiently long stretch of free time in my hands You may need patience, too. -Udo signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
Hi. I can't find that post. Could you point it to me please? Thanks! kj riccardo cagnasso wrote: The post on dons' blog about the cpu scaler is a great example on how haskell can easily used in the day-to-day hacking! 2007/4/11, brad clawsie [EMAIL PROTECTED]: i find that don's haskell hacking blog has been written with the daily hacker in mind: http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/bloghttp://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/%7Edons/blog ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe -- I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind. (Alan Kay) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-Perl-is-more-learnable-than-Haskell-tf3559193.html#a9959852 Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
Hallo, On 4/12/07, kynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi. I can't find that post. Could you point it to me please? It's in here: http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/blog/2007/03/10#programmable-semicolons -- -alex http://www.ventonegro.org/ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
kynnjo: Perhaps Haskell will never lend itself to something like a Perl one-liner, but still I wish that there were books on Haskell that focused on making Haskell useful to the learner as quickly as possible... If such already exist and I've missed it, please let me know. There's some things in the works, but for now you can perhaps find something relevant to what you're trying to do here, http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Blog_articles There's a good breadth of topics covered. Also, I recommend hanging out on #haskell, you'll just see so many interesting haskell snippets, have people to help answer questions, and of course, the lambdabot, that you can't help but learn haskell by osmosis! http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/IRC_channel Good luck. Hope to see you online. -- Don P.S. Have a fix point! Control.Monad.Fix.fix ((1:) . scanl (+) 1) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
My opinion is that learnin haskell is difficult is just for the fact that when you learn programming, you probably begin with C / C++ or some other procedural/OO programming language, so you get used to think in these ways, and when you have to switch to functional paradigm, you find it difficoult. If you first language is LISP probably you find easy Haskell and difficult pearl. 2007/4/11, kynn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Perl is a large, ugly, messy language filled with quirks and eccentricities, while Haskell is an extremely elegant language whose design is guided by a few overriding ideas. (Or so I'm told.) Based on this one would think that it would be much easier to learn Haskell than to learn Perl, but my experience is exactly the opposite. I've been wanting to learn Haskell for years, literally, but it has been a case of Sisyphus and the Rock. Despite my efforts, I never get to the level of expertise that would make Haskell useful to me. (I don't need elegant factorial or Fibonacci functions in my everyday work.) Sooner or later life intervenes: big project due, long trip abroad, etc., and when I finally return to learning Haskell, I have forgotten almost everything I learned and I have to start all over again. (BTW, I've heard similar stories from many wannabe Haskell programmers.) Arguably, this experience means that I have no business learning Haskell, because it's just not relevant to my work. Maybe so, but I still cling to the fanciful notion that if I knew Haskell well enough, I would find plenty of stuff to do with it in my daily work... Anyway, in contrast to my struggle with Haskell, I learned Perl incrementally over the years, by using it in daily little projects, ranging at first from command-line snippets to 100-line self-contained scripts, and moving on to larger, hairier projects. This daily reinforcement of the little bits of Perl I was picking up was crucial to my being able to retain it and move forward. Perhaps Haskell will never lend itself to something like a Perl one-liner, but still I wish that there were books on Haskell that focused on making Haskell useful to the learner as quickly as possible... If such already exist and I've missed it, please let me know. Or I can always wait until I retire; then I'll probably have a sufficiently long stretch of free time in my hands (barring any operations, strokes, heart attacks, hip fractures, etc.). I bet I could start a Haskell Wannabes Club at the nursing home... kj -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-Perl-is-more-learnable-than-Haskell-tf3559193.html#a9938938 Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe -- I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind. (Alan Kay) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
Sorry to hear of your struggles. There has been a lot of work lately on writing Haskell tutorials but there's still a long way to go, unfortunately, as I discovered when I tried recently to find the collection of sample code fragments on the wiki that I'm sure are around somewhere. I had the advantage of coming to Haskell after already having used ML and Common Lisp. But, FWIW, I found it worth persevering: I liked a lot of my legacy Perl scripts more after I ported them to Haskell and now I use Haskell for the sort of thing I might have used bash or perl for previously. (For instance, on the way home last night my GPS' NMEA-0183 data was odd enough that I used Haskell to write a simple daemon that sits between clients and my gpsd and rewrites their conversation; previously, I'd have used Perl for that.) Though, it helps if you get on well with Perl. It didn't suit me very well so I had more motivation to switch than you might. But, now, by choice, I do use Haskell for the kind of thing I'd have previously used a short script for instead, so there might still be light at the end of the tunnel for you. -- Mark ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
I am also coming at haskell from a perl background. While there is some truth to what you say, I do think haskell can be used for keeping simple things simple in a way similar to perl. Though you have to search harder since the documentation / tutorials seem to be more optimized for making hard things possible. (And in fact, much easier than in perl.) But back to the easy, here is a thread concerning one liners in haskell http://groups.google.de/group/fa.haskell/browse_thread/thread/e948ff0ad4d7c0c9/ac0a46d1f841db59?lnk=stq=haskell+one+linersrnum=1hl=en#ac0a46d1f841db59 I think if you really have desire the best route is to complement googling around with asking on #haskell and the newsgroups. It's a *very* friendly community. hope this helps! 2007/4/11, kynn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Perl is a large, ugly, messy language filled with quirks and eccentricities, while Haskell is an extremely elegant language whose design is guided by a few overriding ideas. (Or so I'm told.) Based on this one would think that it would be much easier to learn Haskell than to learn Perl, but my experience is exactly the opposite. I've been wanting to learn Haskell for years, literally, but it has been a case of Sisyphus and the Rock. Despite my efforts, I never get to the level of expertise that would make Haskell useful to me. (I don't need elegant factorial or Fibonacci functions in my everyday work.) Sooner or later life intervenes: big project due, long trip abroad, etc., and when I finally return to learning Haskell, I have forgotten almost everything I learned and I have to start all over again. (BTW, I've heard similar stories from many wannabe Haskell programmers.) Arguably, this experience means that I have no business learning Haskell, because it's just not relevant to my work. Maybe so, but I still cling to the fanciful notion that if I knew Haskell well enough, I would find plenty of stuff to do with it in my daily work... Anyway, in contrast to my struggle with Haskell, I learned Perl incrementally over the years, by using it in daily little projects, ranging at first from command-line snippets to 100-line self-contained scripts, and moving on to larger, hairier projects. This daily reinforcement of the little bits of Perl I was picking up was crucial to my being able to retain it and move forward. Perhaps Haskell will never lend itself to something like a Perl one-liner, but still I wish that there were books on Haskell that focused on making Haskell useful to the learner as quickly as possible... If such already exist and I've missed it, please let me know. Or I can always wait until I retire; then I'll probably have a sufficiently long stretch of free time in my hands (barring any operations, strokes, heart attacks, hip fractures, etc.). I bet I could start a Haskell Wannabes Club at the nursing home... kj -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-Perl-is-more-learnable-than-Haskell-tf3559193.html#a9938938 Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
-Original Message- From: Mark T.B. Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Apr 11, 2007 10:18 AM To: kynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: haskell-cafe@haskell.org Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell Sorry to hear of your struggles. There has been a lot of work lately on writing Haskell tutorials but there's still a long way to go, unfortunately, as I discovered when I tried recently to find the collection of sample code fragments on the wiki that I'm sure are around somewhere. A serious omission in Haskell tutorials is a collection of examples of how to write Haskell solutions for problems that would use arrays in any imperative language. I see that arrays can be defined in Haskell, but I don't see their use as computationally efficient in Haskell. http://RepublicBroadcasting.org - Because You CAN Handle The Truth! http://iceagenow.com - Because Global Warming Is A Scam! ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 05:55:08AM -0700, kynn wrote: Perl is a large, ugly, messy language filled with quirks and eccentricities, while Haskell is an extremely elegant language whose design is guided by a few overriding ideas. (Or so I'm told.) i find that don's haskell hacking blog has been written with the daily hacker in mind: http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/blog my own experience is that i would gladly replace perl for many tasks if haskell's libraries were *easier to use*. for common and simple tasks like reading data from a network resource (http, ftp), querying a database, accessing xml (dom, etc), its more important to me to have an api that is simple to use than one that takes an interesting approach. perl's apis for these tasks tend to be very simple. hackage seems to be on track to deliver the advantages of the cpan tool and repository, so in that sense i think one of the key advantages of perl has been adopted by the haskell community. both languages have great communities! ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
The post on dons' blog about the cpu scaler is a great example on how haskell can easily used in the day-to-day hacking! 2007/4/11, brad clawsie [EMAIL PROTECTED]: i find that don's haskell hacking blog has been written with the daily hacker in mind: http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/bloghttp://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/%7Edons/blog ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe -- I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind. (Alan Kay) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
Hallo, On 4/11/07, riccardo cagnasso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The post on dons' blog about the cpu scaler is a great example on how haskell can easily used in the day-to-day hacking! Just read it, it's a very nice post. I'm not afraid of math, but it's a relief to see some code I can relate with. :-) -- -alex http://www.ventonegro.org/ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 05:55:08AM -0700, kynn wrote: Perl is a large, ugly, messy language filled with quirks and eccentricities, while Haskell is an extremely elegant language whose design is guided by a few overriding ideas. (Or so I'm told.) Based on this one would think that it would be much easier to learn Haskell than to learn Perl, but my experience is exactly the opposite. Haskell useful to the learner as quickly as possible... If such already snip exist and I've missed it, please let me know. Or I can always wait until I retire; then I'll probably have a sufficiently long stretch of free time in my hands (barring any operations, strokes, heart attacks, hip fractures, etc.). I bet I could start a Haskell Wannabes Club at the nursing home... kj My experience is a lot like yours, except I retired 5 years ago, and still haven't learned Haskell. Unfortunately, I've had lots of interruptions that have kept me away from the keyboard. I've got a few unfinished projects, including one I started in Perl years ago, moved to Python, then moved to Haskell. The only useful thing I've programmed since I retired was a program to update my checkbook/bank statement postgresql database using Prolog for parsing entries the way I like to write them in a text file. Someday I'll move this to Haskell :-). I've sworn off other languages since I don't have any deadlines except my own. I never really learned Perl, but I used it a lot for simple one to thirty liners. The thing was, any thing I wanted to do I could find the bits and pieces of in Learning Perl, Programming Perl, or Learning Perl/TK. I have on my shelf Haskell: The craft..., The Haskell school of expression, and The Haskell road to Logic I've read them. I know I should sit down with each one at the computer and work through the exercises. But..,. When my current spate of unavoidable interruptions is over, I'll look into the email on Haskell one-liners, and some of the new tutorials to try to come back up to speed. Not in a nursing home yet! Good luck, John Velman ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
If you first language is LISP probably you find easy Haskell and difficult pearl. Hi, my first programming language is lisp (that is, the language I am most fluent in -- recently Common Lisp, earlier Scheme) and I find Haskell a problematic programming language (this is a fresh experience -- I am writing a syndrome-networks based DSS in Haskell now) because it is not a language. Lisp is a language and Haskell is not, in the sense that lisp allows to write programs that can be read aloud and understood from reading the code. Haskell is a notation that is not a literature by itself, and for Haskell, literate programming, that is, writing more comments than code, is a must; while for lisp it is a rather exotic practice. David ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
kynn wrote: Perl is a large, ugly, messy language filled with quirks and eccentricities, while Haskell is an extremely elegant language whose design is guided by a few overriding ideas. (Or so I'm told.) [snip] May I ask why you want to learn it so much, if you find it so hard? I'm sure most would disagree with me but maybe you'd be better off with perl for your one liners and scripts if it serves your purpose well. You say that you've heard Haskell is extremely elegant, but is that really the reason you want to start using it as your general purpose and scripting language? I'm also interested in it myself because of it's elegance, and in order to learn different paradigms, to explore the strength of the type system etc etc, but I'm not in a particular rush to be able to use it as the one true language for scripting or web applications, or xyz, as quite a few people lately seem to be asking about. Just curious. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-Perl-is-more-learnable-than-Haskell-tf3559193.html#a9946886 Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:21:41PM +0100, Will Newton wrote: On 4/11/07, kynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perl is a large, ugly, messy language filled with quirks and eccentricities, while Haskell is an extremely elegant language whose design is guided by a few overriding ideas. (Or so I'm told.) Based on this one would think that it would be much easier to learn Haskell than to learn Perl, but my experience is exactly the opposite. I've been trying to learn Haskell for some time also, and I've learnt lots of various other languages in the past. I think one of the biggest problems is if there is a considerable learning curve, which Haskell undoubtedly has, there's a nagging question in the back of your head while you try and get a simple task accomplished in an unfamiliar language - why am I bothering with this, I could do it in 5 minutes in Perl/Python/Ruby/...!. And for many simple tasks Perl is a really good fit - it's best to find a task that plays to Haskell's strengths so you get a bit of positive reinforcement while you work. I have been working with Parsec to do some parsing recently and I can definitely recommend it. I don't think I've used such a capable and easy to use parsing framework in any language and it's really kept me going with Haskell where I might have just done it in Python in the past. Writing interpreters is one task where Haskell is really nice. I suggest Unlambda, it makes a nice toy language. The syntax is easy to work with, and continuations make the semantics interesting enough that you can't just rely on the host language acting the same way, like you generally can with mutable state, sequential evaluation and so on (unless you're using something like scheme or ml, but then you probably wouldn't have trouble with Haskell). Brandon ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
Hi, I'm guessing you're not doing it the right way. cvs -d :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/srv/CVSROOT co SYRENE/src By using types, you implementation becomes a lot more readable. Being readable is not enough for being readable aloud. And I think a lot of people here will disagree with you... That's good news. I would not bother to express my option if I thought that there would not be a lot of people who would disagree. David ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 05:55:08AM -0700, kynn wrote: Perl is a large, ugly, messy language filled with quirks and eccentricities, while Haskell is an extremely elegant language whose design is guided by a few overriding ideas. (Or so I'm told.) Based on this one would think that it would be much easier to learn Haskell than to learn Perl, but my experience is exactly the opposite. Perhaps it's just that being more elegant doesn't make it easier to learn. There are almost no overriding ideas in SKI combinator calculus, but I wouldn't say it's a nice and easy programming language (Well, OK, I didn't try to master it, so maybe I'm wrong). The biggest problem with Haskell is that not only you can do things differently (than in other languages) - you have to! Also, some tasks are only easy when you know some advanced programming techniques, like parsing with parser combinators. There is also the problem that fundamental concepts are quite entangled, and it's difficult to choose the starting point when learning or teaching. The language also seems a bit schizophrenic. For example, you can say that it has side-effects and that it has no side-effects, and both statements are true in some sense (expression evaluation has no side-effects but there are features like IO, mutable arrays, etc. - it's quite difficult to explain to beginners why there is no contradiction, or where is the trick, in other words). Actually, I don't know which is the biggest problem... and there are more of them. Best regards Tomasz ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
On 4/11/07, riccardo cagnasso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you first language is LISP probably you find easy Haskell and difficult pearl. I must say I agree here. I spent 10 years programming in prolog before I tried haskell. Most of my problems with haskell are because it has a rather opaque performance model (e.g. when should you use tail recursion, and when should you not). But I happily acknowledge that my experience is probably atypical. ;-) cheers, T. -- Dr Thomas Conway You are beautiful; but learn to work, [EMAIL PROTECTED] for you cannot eat your beauty. -- Congo proverb ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
riccardo cagnasso wrote: My opinion is that learnin haskell is difficult is just for the fact that when you learn programming, you probably begin with C / C++ or some other procedural/OO programming language... Actually, my first language was Scheme; I loved it, and I aced the class, but that was many years ago, and I never had to code real world applications with Scheme. My problems with Haskell are not conceptual, but rather pragmatic. I have not been able to find enough support in Haskell for everyday tasks (e.g. read a stream from a socket; parse it into a simple data structure; process the data in the structure; print out the results to a socket; etc.), and unless I want to code large low-level libraries from scratch just to get conceptually simple tasks done, I can't afford to use Haskell (any more than I could afford to use barebones C, for that matter). And even though my interest in learning Haskell is not a pragmatic one (I'm quite productive with the tools I know; I just want to learn a new way to program, by way of intellectual curiosity), my life is such that, unless I can immediately make use of the language I'm attempting to learn, it just won't stick! The language needs it to be useful not because I need a tool, but because unless it is useful my brain just won't absorb it! kj -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-Perl-is-more-learnable-than-Haskell-tf3559193.html#a9952211 Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why Perl is more learnable than Haskell
On Apr 11, 2007, at 23:10 , kynn wrote: rather pragmatic. I have not been able to find enough support in Haskell for everyday tasks (e.g. read a stream from a socket; parse it into a simple The stuff in Network (not Network.Socket) gives you a Handle, which you can treat more or less like any other Haskell Handle (filehandle). Network.Socket should be reserved for when you need to work at a really low level. -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] [EMAIL PROTECTED] system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] [EMAIL PROTECTED] electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
