On 15-Jul-1998, S. Alexander Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Are you wanting to do away with Makefiles?
> > Makefiles can do an awful lot more than import chasing can
> > and GNU makefiles are very, very short in the normal case.
>
> Both Java and Eiffel attempt to do away with Makefiles
Hi,
I'm planning to design some semi-automated tools for (Yuk!) Y2K processing
of (quite) a few files.
I'm trying to determine what my language choices are. Currently I have a
bias towards using a functional language to implement these programs, but
a) this decision has yet to be finalized;
b)
> But if there are too many things missing, no one will use Standard
> Haskell - it already seems as if most of the people on this list are
> going to go straight to Haskell 2, which would mean that Standard
> Haskell might only be used for teaching.
Indeed, I do expect that most of the people o
ICFP Functional Programming Contest
---
Convinced your favorite functional programming language provides
unbeatable productivity? Perhaps it's just the case that functional
programming languages attract better programmers than ot
>Indeed, I do expect that most of the people on this list will
>go straight to (the moving target of) Haskell 2. The purpose of
>Std Haskell is to address the needs of people who don't need the
>latest greatest, but do need something stable. For example,
>the fact that Haskell keeps moving (whic
