On May 20, 2009, at 5:42 PM, Raoul Duke wrote:
> > hi, > > Seems like Haskell's laziness has an aura of "it will bite you > performance-wise sooner or later." What is different (I'm asking > didactically, not snarkily) about Clojure's laziness? Does it manage > to avoid some aspects of the "uh ohs" in Haskell? Yes, it does avoid most of them. Instead of having to grok monads and strictness annotations, you have doall and dorun which are just functions, and only sequences are lazy. Clojure's lazy sequences strike me as a balance between explicit iterators and a completely lazy language. Memoize and delay/force give you most of the other laziness or pure functional benefits you get in Haskell. (By the way, strictness annotations do wonders for making sense of Haskell.) Try it out. I bet you'll find it lots easier. — Daniel Lyons http://www.storytotell.org -- Tell It! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
