[Haskell-cafe] How to fulfill the "code-reuse" destiny of OOP?

Michael Vanier mvanier42 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 31 22:00:52 EDT 2009

Gregory Collins wrote:
> Tom Davie <tom.davie at gmail.com> writes:
>> On 10/31/09, Magicloud Magiclouds <magicloud.magiclouds at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> After all, I never think OO as an oppsite way to all other things. The
>>> idea is so general that if you say I cannot use it in Haskell at all,
>>> that would make me feel weird. The only difference between languages
>>> is, some are easy to be in OO style, some are not.
>> Wow, someone drank the cool aid!
> Doing OO-style programming in Haskell is difficult and unnatural, it's
> true (although technically speaking it is possible). That said, nobody's
> yet to present a convincing argument to me why Java gets a free pass for
> lacking closures and typeclasses.
> G.
Because most programmers have never heard of closures and typeclasses, 
and thus have no idea how useful they are? :-(

BTW using existential types in Haskell you can mimic OO to a pretty 
decent degree, at least as far as interfaces are concerned.


More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list