[Haskell-cafe] I read somewhere that for 90% of a wide class of computing problems, you only need 10% of the source code in Haskell, that you would in an imperative language.

[Peter Verswyvelen]

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Coppin
<andrewcoppin at btinternet.com>wrote:

> Sure. But what is a computer program? It's a *list of instructions* that
> tells a computer *how to do something*. And yet, the Haskell definition of
> sum looks more like a definition of what a sum is rather than an actual,
> usable procedure for *computing* that sum. (Of course, we know that it /is/
> in fact executable... it just doesn't look it at first sight.)
>

Is it? The list of instruction is just an abstraction layer built on top of
purely physical process of electrons and transistors; I'm not sure how much
imperativeness remains at this level? Not to mention the quantum mechanical
processes that take place... And that are also just mathematical models... I
mean, it really depends from which angle and at which detail you look at it,
no?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20091001/bfe7ae76/attachment.html