Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
Hello Andrew, Monday, June 18, 2007, 9:31:46 PM, you wrote: OTOH... how the heck do you write an operating system in a language that doesn't even support I/O? :-S it does lazily creates new world on each IO operation. advantages: if some file will be never used in future, it will not be written at all :) -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
On Sunday 17 June 2007 23:56:51 Claus Reinke wrote: i didn't know that Yi had acquired a tongue-in-cheek mode already!-) at least i hope that's what it was, because the ermacs lesson was not about contributing code or better language, but about sheer size and momentum being in favour of the weaker solution. I think that we should not underestimate the transforming power of dogged determination. Think of Linux: only a terminal idiot could have conceived the plan of writing from scratch a clone of a 20 years old operating system (Unix) when everybody knew that momentum was on the side of the weaker solution (Microsoft) in the PC market and on the many existing commercial Unix versions in the professional market. Well, we all know what that stupid idea has led to. I certainly do, as I am writing this message under Linux. Whenever we act, we do so in a context that determines the value of our actions. However, our actions also create a new context. Linux, in the context in which it was started, was an unequivocaly bad idea. However, its existence has created a new context where it has a real value. So, the idea of writing an Emacs-like system in Haskell might be ill-considered but, as you also notice in the rest of your message, that doesn't make it worthless in a long-term perspective. An even more relevant example might be Eclipse: Eclipse is very much the Java Emacs: a customisable application framework with a zillion extension. Creating it was a major effort but, thanks to that effort, Java has greatly increased its reach and credibility, in particular as a viable solution to write desktop applications. Maybe, just maybe, yi might play a similar role for Haskell. Regards, titto ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
On Mon, 2007-18-06 at 09:49 +0100, Pasqualino 'Titto' Assini wrote: Maybe, just maybe, yi might play a similar role for Haskell. This is what I am hoping for (and why I'm now trying to get Yi working). I just hope it doesn't become the stovepipe that emacs is. -- Michael T. Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GoogleTalk: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) In his errors a man is true to type. Observe the errors and you will know the man. (孔夫子) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
I think that we should not underestimate the transforming power of dogged determination. .. So, the idea of writing an Emacs-like system in Haskell might be ill-considered but, as you also notice in the rest of your message, that doesn't make it worthless in a long-term perspective. indeed. i was just asking whether you are aware of the odds. but as long as you are, it is nice to see such enthusiasm!-) claus ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
Pasqualino 'Titto' Assini wrote: I think that we should not underestimate the transforming power of dogged determination. Think of Linux: only a terminal idiot could have conceived the plan of writing from scratch a clone of a 20 years old operating system (Unix) when everybody knew that momentum was on the side of the weaker solution (Microsoft) in the PC market and on the many existing commercial Unix versions in the professional market. Well, we all know what that stupid idea has led to. I certainly do, as I am writing this message under Linux. That reminds me... Somebody should write an *OS* in Haskell! :-D If that happened, then maybe at last I'd be able to have a choice other than M$ Windows (with all it's well-documented faults), and Unix (with its legendary unfriendliness and unecessary complexity). OTOH... how the heck do you write an operating system in a language that doesn't even support I/O? :-S ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
Hallo, On 6/18/07, Andrew Coppin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OTOH... how the heck do you write an operating system in a language that doesn't even support I/O? :-S You can start from here: http://programatica.cs.pdx.edu/House/ Cheers, -- -alex http://www.ventonegro.org/ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
On 6/18/07, Andrew Coppin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pasqualino 'Titto' Assini wrote: I think that we should not underestimate the transforming power of dogged determination. Think of Linux: only a terminal idiot could have conceived the plan of writing from scratch a clone of a 20 years old operating system (Unix) when everybody knew that momentum was on the side of the weaker solution (Microsoft) in the PC market and on the many existing commercial Unix versions in the professional market. Well, we all know what that stupid idea has led to. I certainly do, as I am writing this message under Linux. That reminds me... Somebody should write an *OS* in Haskell! :-D If that happened, then maybe at last I'd be able to have a choice other than M$ Windows (with all it's well-documented faults), and Unix (with its legendary unfriendliness and unecessary complexity). OTOH... how the heck do you write an operating system in a language that doesn't even support I/O? :-S Well, there hasn't been a lot of work done on the subject but you probably should look at http://programatica.cs.pdx.edu/House/ Now if you're seriously asking how one would do it, the basic approach taken in the paper was to create a monad H that was a controlled subset of IO that did all the fundamental interactions with the the hardware. The operations of H, as with IO, have to be primitives in the runtime that you're using and probably written in C or assembly. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andrew Coppin wrote: OTOH... how the heck do you write an operating system in a language that doesn't even support I/O? :-S Back when I was first learning programming, with C, I had that exact same question: how the heck can your program DO anything, when the language consists of a bunch of functions that are executed that can only modify meaningless variables your program defines? (C standard defines modifications to volatile variables as side-effects, actually.) It's because your environment knows how to call into the kernel, the kernel knows how to make you computer do things - and that usually involves a bit of assembly, because the C language doesn't define non-program-logic for the compiler to translate. Source-language extensions to C allow inline assembly (and much more), so I'm sure something appropriate could be done for Haskell if that was judged as the best approach. Isaac -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGduIWHgcxvIWYTTURAoRQAKC6vOw01VfwaPJavhcL5YV+lKlHagCdHUjB guyrL0QcQUTfHG8PW91Wm+Q= =2Xeu -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
Creighton Hogg wrote: On 6/18/07, *Andrew Coppin* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That reminds me... Somebody should write an *OS* in Haskell! :-D Well, there hasn't been a lot of work done on the subject but you probably should look at http://programatica.cs.pdx.edu/House/ Now if you're seriously asking how one would do it, the basic approach taken in the paper was to create a monad H that was a controlled subset of IO that did all the fundamental interactions with the the hardware. The operations of H, as with IO, have to be primitives in the runtime that you're using and probably written in C or assembly. I read about House once. It seemed too far-out to be true. OTOH, it's only a proof-of-concept system. I doubt it will ever become a real, usable system, sadly. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] yi or not to yi was: IDE?
On 6/18/07, Andrew Coppin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Creighton Hogg wrote: On 6/18/07, *Andrew Coppin* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That reminds me... Somebody should write an *OS* in Haskell! :-D Well, there hasn't been a lot of work done on the subject but you probably should look at http://programatica.cs.pdx.edu/House/ Now if you're seriously asking how one would do it, the basic approach taken in the paper was to create a monad H that was a controlled subset of IO that did all the fundamental interactions with the the hardware. The operations of H, as with IO, have to be primitives in the runtime that you're using and probably written in C or assembly. I read about House once. It seemed too far-out to be true. OTOH, it's only a proof-of-concept system. I doubt it will ever become a real, usable system, sadly. Well if no one works on it, that's kind of a given. :-P But more seriously, what seems so far out about it? I'm curious. Also, if this thread of operating systems functional programming isn't interesting to other people then we should probably just take it to e-mail not the list. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
