My usual rhetoric is that one-off, throwaway scripts never are, and not only do
they tend to stay around but they take on a life of their own. Today's 10-line
file munger is tomorrow's thousand-line ETL batch job on which the business
depends for some crucial data - yet the original author is long gone and no-one
dares modify in case it breaks. So it is just good sense to use sound practices
from the very beginning.
One of the features of Perl is that it will try to work even if you make type
errors (e.g. give it a scalar in place of a list, or a string instead of an
int). One day, however, it WILL fail. Haskell finds these types of bugs
upfront, and not when your pager goes off at 3am...
Cheers,
G
------Original Message------
From: Michael Litchard
Sender: haskell-cafe-boun...@haskell.org
To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Subject: [Haskell-cafe] help me evangelize haskell.
Sent: Sep 4, 2010 17:38
I'll be starting a new job soon as systems tool guy. The shop is a
perl shop as far as internal automation tasks go. But I am fortunate
to not be working with bigots. If they see a better way, they'll take
to it. So please give me your best arguments in favor of using haskell
for task automation instead of perl, or awk or any of those scripting
lanugages.
_______________________________________________
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
