DDC compiler and effects; better than Haskell? (was Re:
jason.dusek at gmail.com
Wed Aug 12 19:42:18 EDT 2009
2009/08/12 Dan Doel <dan.doel at gmail.com>:
> On Wednesday 12 August 2009 10:12:14 am John A. De Goes wrote:
> > I think the point is that a functional language with a
> > built- in effect system that captures the nature of effects
> > is pretty damn cool and eliminates a lot of boilerplate.
> It's definitely an interesting direction (possibly even the
> right one in the long run), but it's not without its faults
> currently (unless things have changed since I looked at it).
> For instance: what effects does disciple support? Mutation and
> IO? What if I want non-determinism, or continuations, etc.?
> How do I as a user add those effects to the effect system, and
> specify how they should interact with the other effects? As
> far as I know, there aren't yet any provisions for this, so
> presumably you'll end up with effect system for effects
> supported by the compiler, and monads for effects you're
> writing yourself.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe