[Haskell-cafe] Haskell not ready for Foo [was: Re: Hypothetical Haskell job in New York]

[John A. De Goes]

Take, for example, RabbitMQ. There's nothing even remotely close in  
Haskell-land.

RabbitMQ is written in 100% Erlang. It's built on Open Telecom  
Platform, which again is without equal in Haskell.

There are a lot of theoretical reasons why Haskell would be a good  
choice to build libraries such as these, but lacking any production  
implementations, it's all just theory.

Regards,

John

On Jan 8, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Creighton Hogg wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:32 AM, John A. De Goes <john at n-brain.net>  
> wrote:
>>
>> Haskell's networking support is very rudimentary. Erlang's is quite
>> sophisticated. For network intensive applications, especially those
>> requiring messaging, fault-tolerance, distribution, and so forth,  
>> there's no
>> doubt that Erlang is a more productive choice.
>>
>> Not because of the language, per se, but because of all the stuff  
>> that is
>> packaged with it, or available for it.
>
> Now I understand that there aren't(?) any Haskell implementations that
> can act as distributed nodes the way the Erlang implementation can,
> but I'm not familiar enough with Erlang to understand what it has for
> networking that the Haskell network packages don't have.  Could you
> explain a bit further?  I've been thinking a lot about network
> programming anyway lately & am looking for library opportunities.