2009/1/29 Gour <g...@mail.inet.hr> > >>>>> "Conal" == Conal Elliott <co...@conal.net> writes: > Hi Conal, > > Conal> Hi Achim, I came to the same conclusion: I want to sweep aside > Conal> these OO, imperative toolkits, and replace them with something > Conal> "genuinely functional", which for me means having a precise & > Conal> simple compositional (denotational) semantics. Something > Conal> meaningful, formally tractable, and powefully compositional from > Conal> the ground up. As long as we build on complex legacy libraries > Conal> (Gtk, wxWidgets, Qt, OpenGL/GLUT, ...), we'll be struggling > Conal> against (or worse yet, drawn into) their ad hoc mental models and > Conal> system designs. > > Conal> As Meister Eckhart said, "Only the hand that erases can write the > Conal> true thing." > > Nicely said... > > I'm sure you're not the only one desiring to write GUI in "genuinely > functional" toolkit, but, being realistic and considering how many people > are working on bindings for those "legacy libraries", I doubt we'll see > something written from the scratch and usable for "Real World Haskell" > soon ;) > > > Sincerely, > Gour
Hi Gour, I don't mind if it takes a while, since I'm confident it'll be worth the wait. Besides, compositionality yields exponential rewards. Some more encouragement from my friends: "No army can withstand the strength of an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw Regards, - Conal
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
