[Haskell-cafe] help me evangelize haskell.

[Michael Litchard]

I will be going into a situation where there are tasks that have yet
to be automated, so I will be going after that before re-writing
anything. But if I can come up with "here's why", there will be less
eyebrows raised. Thanks for all feedback so far.

On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Gaius Hammond <Gaius at gaius.org.uk> wrote:
> My usual rhetoric is that one-off, throwaway scripts never are, and not only do they tend to stay around but they take on a life of their own. Today's 10-line file munger is tomorrow's thousand-line ETL batch job on which the business depends for some crucial data - yet the original author is long gone and no-one dares modify in case it breaks. So it is just good sense to use sound practices from the very beginning.
>
>
> One of the features of Perl is that it will try to work even if you make type errors (e.g. give it a scalar in place of a list, or a string instead of an int). One day, however, it WILL fail. Haskell finds these types of bugs upfront, and not when your pager goes off at 3am...
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> G
>
> ------Original Message------
> From: Michael Litchard
> Sender: haskell-cafe-bounces at haskell.org
> To: haskell-cafe at haskell.org
> Subject: [Haskell-cafe] help me evangelize haskell.
> Sent: Sep 4, 2010 17:38
>
> I'll be starting a new job soon as systems tool guy. The shop is a
> perl shop as far as internal automation tasks go. But I am fortunate
> to not be working with bigots. If they see a better way, they'll take
> to it. So please give me your best arguments in favor of using haskell
> for task automation instead of perl, or awk or any of those scripting
> lanugages.
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
>
> ------------------