Warp wrote:
>   Is that really so? Can you refactor an existing solution (eg. in a library)
> so that it will be more efficient (eg. memorywise) without breaking any
> existing programs?

I don't know about Haskell, but IBM had a language called NIL that was 
very high-level. Everything was processes and SQL-style tables and 
unbounded integers and dynamic code instantiation and such.  They wrote 
the routing software for SNA in it.

When a customer wanted to have two SNA routers sharing the load and 
picking up in the event of a fall-over, the guys on the NIL team 
realized they didn't need to rewrite any NIL code. They simply(*) added 
a flag to the compiler to tell it to generate parallel code with soft 
fail-over. Nothing but the compiler got changed.


(*) For some meaning of "simply" obviously. ;-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message