Take, for example, RabbitMQ. There's nothing even remotely close in
Haskell-land.
RabbitMQ is written in 100% Erlang. It's built on Open Telecom
Platform, which again is without equal in Haskell.
There are a lot of theoretical reasons why Haskell would be a good
choice to build libraries such as these, but lacking any production
implementations, it's all just theory.
Regards,
John
On Jan 8, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Creighton Hogg wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:32 AM, John A. De Goes <j...@n-brain.net>
wrote:
Haskell's networking support is very rudimentary. Erlang's is quite
sophisticated. For network intensive applications, especially those
requiring messaging, fault-tolerance, distribution, and so forth,
there's no
doubt that Erlang is a more productive choice.
Not because of the language, per se, but because of all the stuff
that is
packaged with it, or available for it.
Now I understand that there aren't(?) any Haskell implementations that
can act as distributed nodes the way the Erlang implementation can,
but I'm not familiar enough with Erlang to understand what it has for
networking that the Haskell network packages don't have. Could you
explain a bit further? I've been thinking a lot about network
programming anyway lately & am looking for library opportunities.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
