[Haskell-cafe] Re: statep haskell-lang [was: Re: Hoogle and
John A. De Goes
john at n-brain.net
Thu Feb 26 15:18:26 EST 2009
Are you saying has been no progress since K&R C in the number of
libraries available to C programmers? And that C programmers still
have to edit files with vi and compile and link by specifying all
files on the command-line?
You may disagree, but the evidence points in the opposite direction.
There are tens of thousands of robust C libraries available to suit
any particular programming need. Many of Haskell's own libraries are
based on C versions. Tool support for the C language (not for some
successor you might think would exist if the language continued
evolving) can detect memory leaks, detect memory overwrites, apply
dozens of automatic refactorings to C large-scale C programs, etc.
Library and tool support for the C language is light years beyond
Haskell. It wouldn't be there if we had been through 20 iterations of
C each completely breaking backward compatibility.
John A. De Goes
The Evolution of Collaboration
http://www.n-brain.net | 877-376-2724 x 101
On Feb 26, 2009, at 1:08 PM, Achim Schneider wrote:
> "John A. De Goes" <john at n-brain.net> wrote:
>> What do you mean by "progress"? I noted before that there are
>> tradeoffs. Constraining the evolution of the language in backward
>> compatible ways leads to substantial improvements in tools,
>> libraries, and the speed of compiled code. That's progress in several
>> dimensions -- just not along the dimension of "language".
> I disagree. Backwards compatibility can be the very reason no
> progress _can_ be made in the areas you mention. The C toolchain was
> and is a mess for anything but small, uniform, single-platform
> programs, things like valgrind of course outperform plain lint in a
> variety of ways, but are still hacks around the language's major flaws
> (And I'm speaking as a C-fan, here). Further breakthroughs in C
> compiler technology will require stalin-like brute force and library
> support... well, did you ever use yacc or libxml and compared them to
> Haskell solutions?
> Java generics are broken by design, for the questionable benefit of
> backwards compatibility. Leave those Bad Decisions to language
> communities who don't care about Doing It Right. "Right" being a
> technological measure here, not how well politics sell to accountants.
> (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers
> for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting,
> performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited.
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
More information about the Haskell-Cafe