In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Rubin <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > I notice that Haskell strings are character lists, i.e. at least > conceptually, "hello" takes the equivalent of five cons cells. Do > real implementations (i.e. GHC) actually work like that? If so, that's > enough to kill the whole thing right there.
Yep. There is a separate packed string type. > > Objective CAML is indeed not a pure functional language. > > Should that bother me? I should say, my interest in Ocaml or Haskell > is not just to try out something new, but also as a step up from both > Python and C/C++ for writing practical code. That is, I'm looking for > something with good abstraction (unlike Java) and type safety (unlike > C/C++), but for the goal of writing high performance code (like > C/C++). I'm even (gasp) thinking of checking out Ada. It's up to you, I'm just saying. Speaking of C++, would you start someone with Python or Java for their first OOPL? Kind of the same idea. Donn Cave, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
