[Haskell-cafe] What *not* to use Haskell for

[Eelco Lempsink]

On 11 nov 2008, at 11:38, Dave Tapley wrote:
> Usually I'll avoid then question and explain that it is a 'complete'
> language and we do have more than enough libraries to make it useful  
> and
> productive. But I'd be keen to know if people have any anecdotes,
> ideally ones which can subsequently be twisted into an argument for
> Haskell ;)


Working with relational databases can be a bit cumbersome.  There's  
some bitrot in the HaskellDB packages in general, so taking a more low- 
level approach seems sensible, but because the lack of extensible  
records you don't get much help from the compiler, so you need to do  
most of the checking (and 'marshalling') yourself.  In that sense,  
it's not worse than doing it with most other languages, except that  
for those languages there are often high-level libraries available to  
do, for example, cute things like object relational mapping (ORM).

-- 
Regards,

Eelco Lempsink

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20081112/82fecd76/PGP.bin