On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 11:46:56PM +0100, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 1. Februar 2006 11:49 schrieb Bulat Ziganshin: > > [...] > > > i had one idea, what is somewhat corresponding to his discussion: > > > > make a strict Haskell dialect. implement it by translating all > > expressions of form "f x" into "f $! x" and then going to the standard > > (lazy) haskell translator. the same for data fields - add to all field > > definitions "!" in translation process. then add to this strict > > Haskell language ability to _explicitly_ specify lazy fields and lazy > > evaluation, for example using this "~" sign > > > > what it will give? ability to use Haskell as powerful strict language, > > what is especially interesting for "real-world" programmers. i have > > found myself permanently fighting against the lazyness once i starting to > > optimize my programs. for the newcomers, it just will reduce learning > > path - they don't need to know anything about lazyness > > Since laziness often allows you to solve problems so elegantly, I'm really > scared of the idea of a "Strict Haskell"! :-( Is laziness really so "unreal" > that real-world programmers have to see it as an enemy which they have to > fight against? > > In fact, I was kind of shocked as I read in Simon Peyton Jones' presentation > "Wearing the hair shirt" [1] that in his opinion "Lazyness doesn't really > matter".
I am with you. If Haskell switches to strictness, I am going to stay with the old compilers, I guess... I just love laziness (or non-strictness). Maybe speculative evaluation is the way to go? Best regards Tomasz -- I am searching for programmers who are good at least in (Haskell || ML) && (Linux || FreeBSD || math) for work in Warsaw, Poland _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list [email protected] http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
