Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
On Mon 27 Nov, Fergus Henderson wrote:
Do you think that Haskell would be better without `unsafePerformIO'?
Well, a sceptic like me is bound to wonder why such a non-function is
provided in a purely functional language. What really worries me is
that
On 27-Nov-2000, Benjamin L. Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just out of curiosity: what makes you so sure about C#?
C# has some potential big problems, too:
in particular, the ability to declare a portion of the code "unsafe,"
which can encourage unsafe programming among entrenched C/C++
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Frank Atanassow wrote:
Java. Do you think that Haskell would be better without `unsafePerformIO'?
Without remarking on C#, I just wanted to point out that unsafePerformIO is
not part of the Haskell language...
Umm, I hope that everyone in the implementors camps feels
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Doug Ransom wrote:
[stuff deleted]
Well, I would prefer to master Haskell and use that as my general purpose
language. Fat chance since the object models available in the microsoft
common language runtime are designed for impertive programming.
I often use Haskell in
