[Haskell-cafe] Why are OCaml and Haskell being used at these companies?

[jerzy.karczmarczuk at info.unicaen.fr]

Henning Thielemann writes: 

> jerzy.karczmarczuk at info.unicaen.fr wrote: 
> 
>> Henning Thielemann writes: 
>>
>> > ?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe
>> > programming. 
>>
>> Is this a religious statement, quite popular in our Church of Functionalism,
>> or you mean something concrete by that, and if yes, then what?
> 
> I meant that these languages, which are the main products of Wolfram and
> MathWorks, respectively, are untyped or at least dynamically typed, and
> thus are certainly not the appropriate tools for reliable development and
> maintenance.  However, I see that Jon Harrop claimed statical type safety
> only for OCaml and Haskell, and functional design and high productivity
> for Mathematica and MatLab et.al.

Well, Henning, it is quite a statement: "certainly not the appropriate tools
for reliable development and maintenance". Tell that to those legions of
people who made dozens of thousands of programs in Lisp (or Scheme), in
Smalltalk, etc. And now in Erlang...
I believe, and I teach that static typing is a good thing, but, please, you
are too young yet for sectarism... 

Jerzy Karczmarczuk