[Haskell-cafe] Metaprogramming in Haskell vs. Ocaml

Jacques Carette carette at mcmaster.ca
Mon Apr 5 15:27:50 EDT 2010

Don Stewart wrote:
> I think we don't see as much metaprogramming because of other language
> features -- laziness, operator syntax, and type classes -- make a bunch
> of common designs work without needing metaprogramming.
While true, there are also 2 other reasons for meta-programmers are not 
all over Haskell:
1. efficiency nuts are already using C++ templates and don't see why 
they would switch,
2. people who care about types use a typed meta-language (like 
metaocaml) instead of an untyped template layer atop a (fantastic!) 
typed language.

Actually, people in the #2 camp (like me) are keeping a close eye on 
dependently-typed languages (like Idris [1]) where partial evaluation 
has been show to be particularly easy and effective.  I am eagerly (!) 
awaiting similar results from the Agda [2] camp.

I believe the world really is ready for a typed metaprogramming 
language.  I know I am.  And I would really like it if Haskell were that 


[1] http://www.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~eb/Idris/
[2] http://wiki.portal.chalmers.se/agda/

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list