[Haskell-cafe] Haskell participating in big science like CERN
vigalchin at gmail.com
Fri Oct 3 19:38:36 EDT 2008
I have to write in C++ everyday. I just worked at D*ll .. a total train
wreck . software very unstable .. written in C++ .... Maybe a lot of blame
can be put at the door of very lazy people; however, in my opinion, the
strong/static type checking seriously "corral" lazy "developers". I have
found myself almost unconsciously thinking in the Haskell strong type
checking Welt Anschauung at work! Totally rocks!
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 8:29 AM, Creighton Hogg <wchogg at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 5:47 AM, Dougal Stanton <dougal at dougalstanton.net>
> > 2008/10/3 Galchin, Vasili <vigalchin at gmail.com>:
> >> Hello,
> >> One of my interests based on my education is "grand challenge
> >> Ok .. let's take the CERN Hadrian Accelerator.
> >> Where do you think Haskell can fit into the CERN Hadrian effort
> >> currently?
> >> Where do you think think Haskell currently is lacking and will have
> >> be improved in order to participate in CERN Hadrian?
> > Is that the experiment where Picts are accelerated to just short of
> > the speed of light in order to smash through to the Roman Empire? ;-)
> > I don't know what the main computational challenges are to the LHC
> > researchers. The stuff in the press has mostly been about
> > infrastructure --- how to store the gigabytes of data per second that
> > they end up keeping, out of the petabytes that are produced in the
> > first place (or something).
> Well, with the LHC efforts I don't think a technology like Haskell
> really has a place...at least not now. Even just a few years back,
> when I worked on this stuff, we were still doing lots of simulation in
> preparation for the actual live experiment and Haskell might have been
> a good choice for some of the tools. All of the detector simulation
> was written in C++, because C++ is the new FORTRAN to physicists, and
> you ain't seen nothing till you've seen a jury-rigged form of lazy
> evaluation built into a class hierarchy in C++. Now, would the C++
> based simulation have run faster than a Haskell based one? Quite
> possibly. On the other hand, I remember how many delays and problems
> were caused by the sheer complexity of the codebase. That's where a
> more modern programming language might have been extremely helpful.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe