Invisible wrote:

> Yeah. It's a hoot. You use one library that uses array-X, and another 
> library that uses array-Y, and now your program must waste time 
> converting from one to the other. Great fun. :-/
> 
> It wouldn't be so bad if we were talking about complete libraries that 
> differ stylistically or something. But we're not. We're talking about 
> several libraries, each of which only covers about 20% of what you might 
> like to do. But each library covers a different 20%. Which means you're 
> virtually *forced* to use several of them at once... *sigh*
> 
> Apparently everybody else thinks this is "perfectly OK".

Irony: Haskell was invented because there are numerous "competing" 
functional programming languages, and people wanted to concentrate their 
efforts on just one such language.

So having several different but essentially equivilent programming 
languages was "bad". But having several different but somewhat 
overlapping array libraries is "good" and even "to be encouraged". WTF?

Post a reply to this message