Walter Bright:
Speed is only one measure of utility.
I agree, I program often in Python, and it can be very useful, despite being sometimes not fast at all.
But as Haskell folks sometimes say, a modern language should try to allow a high level style of coding while still keeping a "good enough" efficiency.
------------------------ Justin Whear:
I hadn't realized how bug-prone non-trivial loops tend to be until I started writing this way and avoided them entirely.
I agree.
Thus far, I don't think I've rewritten anything out of the component programming style, so while probably not optimal, it's been more than good enough.
Take a look at this thread in D.learn: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mailman.304.1375190212.22075.digitalmars-d-le...@puremagic.com ------------------------ Andrei Alexandrescu:
Is that a lot better than ghc?
According to this article it seems better, but I have no direct experience of it:
http://www.leafpetersen.com/leaf/publications/hs2013/haskell-gap.pdf Bye, bearophile
