On Nov 27, 2007 1:33 PM, apfelmus <<a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
David Menendez wrote:<br><div class="Ih2E3d">> Thomas Davie wrote:<br>><br>>> But the point is that this section of the site is the bit that's meant<br>>> to be an advertisement -- we're trying to encourage people to read
<br>>> more,<br>><br>><br>> Are we? I thought <a href="http://Haskell.org" target="_blank">Haskell.org</a> was intended to describe what Haskell *is*.<br>> There are plenty of articles and blog posts and wiki pages out there that
<br>> advocate Haskell. I don't see why the main web page needs to be polluted<br>> with marketing.<br><br></div>Agreed! I hate marketing! The facts can speak for themselves, if you<br>need somebody to "explain" them, then something's wrong.
<br><br>More specifically, "fact" means something that you can easily check<br>yourself. "Robust"/"maintainable"/"testable" code are things you _can't_<br>easily check yourself without already learning the language.
<br><br>But "shorter code" is a fact you can easily check, for instance with<br>quicksort as example. In fact, "short code" is the reason why I picked<br>up Haskell. Back then, I was given the task to calculate some sequence
<br>of numbers which I did in one page of C code. So far so good, but when I<br>asked the task assigner about his solution, he responded: "Ah, this<br>problem, that's 1 line in Haskell. Well, 2 lines if the terminal is too
<br>small." Such power! Hearing just this was more than enough reason for me<br>to learn Haskell and to never look back.<br><br><br>Regards,<br><font color="#888888">apfelmus<br></font><div><br></div></blockquote></div>
<br>This is not a reasonable definition of "fact". There are many facts which are not practical for a person to verify quickly, and many of them are quite important. It is perfectly reasonable to seek a consensus of experts on a subject, and it is perfectly reasonable to present information such as claims of robustness / maintainability / testability on the assumption that the person reading it will then take steps to verify the claims, generally by asking trusted experts.