[Haskell-cafe] funct.prog. vs logic prog., practical Haskell

[John Lask]

I would have thought that a major motivation for the study of haskell,or for 
that matter ML, Clean, would be their type systems: statically typed higher 
order parametric polymorphism which is certainlly different enough from that 
of prolog to warrant study. So from the perspective of type systems and 
associated gaurantees functional programming languages probably represent 
the best environment in which to study these concepts.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Petr Pudlak" <deb at pudlak.name>
To: "Haskell Cafe" <haskell-cafe at haskell.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 8:25 PM
Subject: [Haskell-cafe] funct.prog. vs logic prog., practical Haskell


>    Hi all,
>
> I'd like to convince people at our university to pay more attention to
> functional languages, especially Haskell. Their arguments were that
>
>    (1) Functional programming is more academic than practical.
>    (2) They are using logic programming already (Prolog); why is Haskell
> better than Prolog (or generally a functional language better than a
> logic programming language)?
>
> (1) is easier to answer, there are a lots of applications at HaskellWiki, 
> or
> elsewhere around the Internet, written in Haskell, OCaml, etc.  Still, I
> welcome comments on your experience, for example, if you have written some
> larger-scale application in Haskell (or another a functional language) 
> that is
> not at HaskellWiki, and perhaps if/why you would recommend doing so to 
> other
> people.
>
> (2) is harder for me, since I've never programmed in Prolog or another 
> language
> for logic programming. I'd be happy if anyone who is experienced in both 
> Prolog
> and Haskell could elaborate the differences, pros & cons etc.
>
>    Thanks,
>    Petr
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>