[Haskell-cafe] Why Not Haskell?
robdockins at fastmail.fm
Wed Aug 9 08:22:26 EDT 2006
On Aug 8, 2006, at 5:36 PM, Albert Lai wrote:
> "Brian Hulley" <brianh at metamilk.com> writes:
>> Also, the bottom line imho is that Haskell is a difficult language to
>> understand, and this is compounded by the apparent cleverness of
>> unreadable code like:
>> c = (.) . (.)
>> when a normal person would just write:
>> c f g a b = f (g a b)
> All mainstream languages are also difficult to understand, with
> similarly clever, unreadable code. Let's have a fun quiz! Guess the
> mainstream languages in question:
> 2. What language allows you to test primality in constant runtime?
> That is, move all the work to compile time, using its polymorphism.
GHC-Haskell (with enough extensions enabled)? We're most of the way
there already with type arithmetic. I bet putting together a nieve
primality test would be pretty doable. In fact, I suspect that GHC's
type-checker is turing-complete with MPTCs, fundeps, and undecidable
instances. I've been contemplating the possibility of embedding the
lambda calculus for some time (anybody done this already?)
Oops. I see now the qualifier "mainstream". The point still stands,
Speak softly and drive a Sherman tank.
Laugh hard; it's a long way to the bank.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe