Haskell's FFI [1] is really nice, so you could still write your performance-critical parts in C. -deech
[1] http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/interfacing-with-c-the-ffi.html On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Zura_ <x...@gol.ge> wrote: > > It is ironic, but after reading your paper - "Experience Report: Haskell in > the Real World", I doubt I'll use Haskell for a performance critical > systems. Laziness (and understanding it) is one factor, but there is also > GC, which is a real hassle, especially in embedded/mobile systems for a near > real-time applications. > In short, when milliseconds matter I'd prefer to stick with GC-less language > and with native binaries. > > Regards, > Zura > > > Curt Sampson-2 wrote: >> >> (Oh, and the trading system is running in production and making money >> these days. There's no question in my mind that the project was a >> success, and I'd do it in GHC again. Thanks to the Simons and many >> others for the fantastic job they've done with that.) >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/What-is-Haskell-unsuitable-for--tp28897715p29099864.html > Sent from the Haskell - Haskell-Cafe mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe