Re[4]: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
Hello Kaveh, Sunday, August 6, 2006, 5:40:26 PM, you wrote: I think we need a subset of haskell as a new language (or as a developing pattern) to work with and teach and learn more easily as you have mentioned. it called Helium :) but in general problem is what Haskell's way to deal with problems is to find most general and abstract solution, such as enclosing monads just for doing I/O. it's great for programmers interesting in raising their programming languages knowledge (i usually study several new languages each year, so Haskell with all its extensions partially replaces my need in new interesting languages ;) ) but can be nightmare for 99% of programmers. after all, they need to learn many many other things besides of language tricks interesting for souls like me I had read a text about mathematics which was something like this : New mathematic theories does not populize because of their fabiolus logical theorems, but because of death of elder mathematicians and forging a new folk of them that were rised by new theories.. that's true for any science (recall for example Freud's story) and moreover for any ideology (Moses drived Hebrews over the desert for 40 years just in order that Jews that born in slavery was died) That is usefull to have in mind. (And because of that, maybe there is no force to compele someone to disturbe his mind on a peacfull friday afternoon! ;) ) Anyway the point is developing more efficient and easily; instead of serving marketing features of languages. that is entirely different question. while Haskell is rare bird, _i_ can't use it in commercial environment. as one manager said i can easily find 10 C++ programmers. but where i will find 3 Haskell developers? ;) And there must be - and will be - someone (or some will) to makes things better. very high level of FP in Haskell is good but there is no lower level of them somewhere else. So almost the only choice for a useful FP environment is Haskell. if i correctly understood that you mean, there is Ocaml and FP features in many languages. most important things, imho, are anonymous closures and 1st-class functions. even current C# should support this -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
I made a mistake : popularity! This was a meaning that described my thoughts at that moment. Let me make it clear by another question : Can someone say perl is popular? If we see it that way, I meant a good and efficient community-based expansion and some good tools to use. how can we decrease Haskell popularity? Why? Because someone must prevent mean programmers to try Haskell? Or it is a bit of old holy codex? Or maybe I must feal tired of hearing newbies questions? If Haskell replaces C++ is some places - which had been proved is many areas - how amount of bugs will disapear just because of a well designed language? And If you are affraid of something that happens to java by j++ - a lot of buzzy extensions from big boys - why not to have an ISO Haskell? Thanks ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
On 06/08/06, Kaveh Shahbazian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: how can we decrease Haskell popularity? Why? Because someone must prevent mean programmers to try Haskell? Or it is a bit of old holy codex? Or maybe I must feal tired of hearing newbies questions? No, no. He meant a mental exercise. You think how you can decrease popularity. And the you gain insight what not to do. And perhaps you can increase the popularity doing the exact opposite. Regards, -- Intelligence is like a river: the deeper it is, the less noise it makes ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
Then I must apologize again. (Communications and activities are so attractive that I cann't prevent my self from it. One aspect of it is to apologize. :D). Thankyou and Thank you too! ;) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
Hello Kaveh, Sunday, August 6, 2006, 12:54:01 PM, you wrote: how can we decrease Haskell popularity? Why? Because someone must prevent mean programmers to try Haskell? Or it is a bit of old holy codex? Or maybe I must feal tired of hearing newbies questions? all the three and especially the last one: i hate answering stupid novices questions, especially at Friday's evening! :D moreover, it's more exciting game than debating how to raise popularity. i've just reread Wadler's paper i mentioned and tend to somewhat disagree with him: Wadler wrote that FP is unpopular not because average programmer stupidity. I can agree that FP by _itself_ don't need light brains. In fact, if i will sometime teach a beginner programmers, the first language i will show to him will be a functional or logic one - they are most close to the human's nature of thinking but current FP languages is very far from the basic FP concepts! may be because they was developed by scientists, but they involve very complex concepts to accomplish the everyday tasks. using of monads just to organize IO is best-known example so, imaging that i will lead some young programmers with average brains (and i had sich experience using C++) i'm not sure that FP language will be equally easy to master as OOP ones on the other side, it's highly possible that the real cause is that during high school courses students are teached to think in imperative style. developing the better methodologies of FP teaching (or may be they are already developed - i don't read School of FP, for example) may change this situation, but at least now i think it's harder to teach FP programmers than OOP ones. on the other side, this very high level of FP paradigms makes the Haskell interesting for experienced programmers who just want to break their minds :) but this has nothing common with business :D -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
Hi Kaveh, Maybe this is not a proper question but I think It has a point. Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#? Yhc does both :) Java as an interpretter for the haskell byte code, C# as a native MSIL generator. We also have Python as well as C, if you're feeling adventurous. Thanks Neil ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
I think we need a subset of haskell as a new language (or as a developing pattern) to work with and teach and learn more easily as you have mentioned. I had read a text about mathematics which was something like this : New mathematic theories does not populize because of their fabiolus logical theorems, but because of death of elder mathematicians and forging a new folk of them that were rised by new theories.. That is usefull to have in mind. (And because of that, maybe there is no force to compele someone to disturbe his mind on a peacfull friday afternoon! ;) ) Anyway the point is developing more efficient and easily; instead of serving marketing features of languages. And there must be - and will be - someone (or some will) to makes things better. very high level of FP in Haskell is good but there is no lower level of them somewhere else. So almost the only choice for a usefull FP environment is Haskell. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
1 2 - Maybe this is not a proper question but I think It has a point. Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#? What is the need of implementing a class interoperability between Haskell and other plateforms? Maybe we donot need that. Haskell can be the big infrastructure and code snippets in Java or C# can serve in a monadic wrapper. It looks like that we can scripting Haskell in that languages. For example F# 's target code is ILX (an extension of MSIL for functional languages). But I think interoperablity between languages - like what .NET claims - is totaly pointless. Again think of an infrastructure that has a Haskell core which defines and controls very high level processes. Then there will be a running machine that Haskell is sitting on top of it. This running machine implement haskell in the plateform language. This is what I mean. 3 - And for an OOP style interoperability between languages, I think most usefull is to have a robust standard for Object-Broking. Something like IEC 61850 in new power systems in industry. A tool from siemens can understand what a hitachi high voltage key commands and all of these devices are from different providers with different internal implementations that meets the standard. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
I do not meant to compile Haskell to MSIL/JVM. I meant to compile Haskell to the Java or C# itself! And GHC will be there for a high performance language (but still O'Caml is better by the time). But Java proves that in enterprise solution, performance is a complex factor of many thing other than speed alone. I love high performance implementation like Haskell. But there must be a way to populize Haskell! Thanks ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
On 05/08/06, Kaveh Shahbazian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But there must be a way to populize Haskell! What for? Regards, Piotr Kalinowski -- Intelligence is like a river: the deeper it is, the less noise it makes ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
Hello Antonio, Saturday, August 5, 2006, 7:07:17 PM, you wrote: But there must be a way to populize Haskell! What for? On the other hand, individuals that need to belong to an elite, and the RTFM crowd, will experience a further frustration to feed their insecure personality. there is an interesting psychotherapy procedure. if one can't raise some own ability, he can try instead to lower it. such attempts can help to understand how this ability can be raised so i propose opposite game: how can we decrease Haskell popularity? :) -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
Hello Kaveh, Saturday, August 5, 2006, 11:52:16 AM, you wrote: I do not meant to compile Haskell to MSIL/JVM. I meant to compile Haskell to the Java or C# itself! for what? btw, there is a jhc compiler (http://repetae.net/john/) that translates Haskell to ANSI C which allows to reach OCaml-level speed -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
On 05/08/06, Antonio Cangiano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because we are humans and as such, we generally love to share our passions with other people. From a less sociological standpoint, a larger user base implies faster development of interesting projects, more libraries, books, user groups, conferences, etc... Yes, yes. I'm simply not sure if making changes only to reach more and more people is good. On the other hand, individuals that need to belong to an elite, and the RTFM crowd, will experience a further frustration to feed their insecure personality. I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. Would you care to elaborate on it? Regards, -- Intelligence is like a river: the deeper it is, the less noise it makes ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compiling To C And Why Not Compiling To Java Or C#?
On 8/5/06, Piotr Kalinowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, yes. I'm simply not sure if making changes only to reach more and more people is good.These changes are good as long as they possibly add something valuable beside popularity and they don't introduce significant downsides. My point was that the act of striving to increase the popularity of one's favourite language, it is neither a negative nor an unnatural pursuit. I agree though that it should be done intelligently and with a broader aim in mind. I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. Would you care to elaborate on it?Sure. I meant that among small communities some individuals feel special for being part of these elite groups. It's a way to feel different, better, or something along these lines. Therefore they are afraid of any attempt to considerably increase the popularity of their group, because in their minds they would loose their special status (they can't brag they're Haskell hackers if the rest of the world programs in Haskell as well). Regards,Antonio-- My Ruby blog: http://antoniocangiano.comMy Italian community: http://www.visualcsharp.it ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
