[Fwd: F#]

[D. Tweed]

On Fri, 31 May 2002, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty wrote:

> I think, the probelm is .NET, not Haskell.  .NET just
> doesn't deliver on its promise (= marketing hype) of
> language neutrality.  The problem is that .NET is language
> neutral only as long as all languages are sufficiently close
> to C#.  Not just Haskell, but widely used languages like C++
> run into this problem, too (see .NET's Managed C++).

That may (or may not) be the case; I don't know. I was more wondering
about `what really makes it so daunting for some working at a Microsoft
(and who thus has more knowledge available about .NET than external
people) to implement a Haskell for .NET, especially given the existance of
F#?'

One of the thoughts behind this was the knowledge that it's just the two
Simons' at Microsoft Cambridge now maintaining/developing GHC; _if it were
possible_ (and I'll quite concede it may not be) to leverage work on .NET
for other purposes (particularly if .NET actually fulfills one of its
`promises' to be OS neutral) to decrease the amount of work to keep one of
the two Haskell remaining compilers (GHC, NHC) viable and up-to-date.

___cheers,_dave_________________________________________________________
www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~tweed/  |  `It's no good going home to practise
email:tweed@cs.bris.ac.uk  |   a Special Outdoor Song which Has To Be
work tel:(0117) 954-5250   |   Sung In The Snow' -- Winnie the Pooh