On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 03:03:51AM -0500, Mark Goldman wrote: > I have been keeping up with this thread. As a user of Haskell for > comercial purposes, I can say that it does what I want. The only > thing currently on my wish-list is some sort of run time debuging. > (sometimes you want to know how you got to the empty list that you > took the head of :) Anyhow, I find haskell more than adequete for my > programming. I say this to set up my next statement. I really don't > want there to be huge accretions to the language proper. I understand > lisp has had a rough go because there wasn't enough standardisation of > libraries, but on the other hand, I think languages like Java went > overboard. > > My point, I guess, is that I find haskell to be easy and efficient to > develop applications with. It is quite practical. Also, the academic > research that goes in to Haskell continues to make it more practical. > I, for one, do not want the spirit of Haskell to change just to make > it how people think it would be useful in the comercial world. It's > current spirit makes it very useful and rewarding.
Seconded! I especially agree on the following points: - Haskell is useful for practical, commercial purposes NOW - Commercial development gets substantial benefits from academic research and the "academic flavour" of Haskell. If you want a less "academic" language, there are so many to choose from. Personally, I am sometimes a bit distressed by all those big demands articulated by newcomers to Haskell world, perhaps because most of the time these are things completely unneccesary for me (a non-academic programmer). Please have the humility to take some time to learn Haskell more, and then *maybe* you will appreciate the way some things are done. Best regards Tomasz _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
