On 18 April 2011 16:54, Ertugrul Soeylemez <e...@ertes.de> wrote: > > > > > Well, *someone* has to worry about robustness and scalability. Users > > notice when their two minute system builds start taking four minutes > > (and will be at my door wanting me to fix it) because something didn't > > scale fast enough, or have to be run more than once because a failing > > component build wasn't restarted properly. I'm willing to believe that > > haskell lets you write more scalable code than C, but C's tools for > > handling concurrency suck, so that should be true in any language > > where someone actually thought about dealing with concurrency beyond > > locks and protected methods. The problem is, the only language I've > > found where that's true that *also* has reasonable tools to deal with > > scaling beyond a single system is Eiffel (which apparently abstracts > > things even further than haskell - details like how concurrency is > > achieved or how many concurrent operations you can have are configured > > when you start an application, *not* when writing it). Unfortunately, > > Eiffel has other problems that make it undesirable. > > I can't make a comparison, because I don't know Eiffel. >
I do, and I don't recognize what the OP is referring to - I suspect he meant Erlang. -- Colin Adams Preston, Lancashire, ENGLAND () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
_______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
