[Haskell-cafe] Re: Why?

John D. Earle JohnDEarle at cox.net
Thu Dec 10 11:02:08 EST 2009

Eugene, by purity do you mean effect free? There is a subtle difference. The 
lack of effects makes a language functional, but this does not imply that 
the language is pure.

From: "Eugene Kirpichov" <ekirpichov at gmail.com>
Sent: 10 Thursday December 2009 0838
To: "John D. Earle" <JohnDEarle at cox.net>
Cc: "Haskell Cafe" <haskell-cafe at haskell.org>
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Why?

> 2009/12/10 John D. Earle <JohnDEarle at cox.net>:
>> My intuition says that laziness and purity are distinct whereas yours 
>> says
>> that purity is a necessary condition. This is what needs to be 
>> reconciled.
> Mixing impurity and laziness makes code whose behavior is too hard to
> understand. So, there is no theoretical reason not to mix them, but
> there is a practical one.
>> I believe that everyone is thinking that lazy evaluation and strict
>> evaluation are similar activities whereas they are profoundly different.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
> -- 
> Eugene Kirpichov
> Web IR developer, market.yandex.ru 

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list