Fwd: [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.

[Alberto G. Corona]

;)
Off topic:

Maybe the entire space time,  the universe and his history, is isomorphic to
a mathematical structure.

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/toe_frames.html

<http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/toe_frames.html>
2009/10/1 Peter Verswyvelen <bugfact at gmail.com>

>
>
> 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?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20091001/9168d00a/attachment.html