On 06/10/2010 03:42 PM, scott wrote:

> Almost twice as slow as C/C++, that means if you're developing a program
> that does anything in realtime, you can do twice as much in C++ than
> Haskell. That sucks. All the other slower languages suck even more badly
> for realtime stuff.

Right. And when somebody writes the benchmarks in assembly and it's 
another 80% faster, that will mean that C sucks, right?

Never mind "minor details" such as reliability, maintainability, 
security, development effort, portability...

> BTW, can you easily do
> sound/image/video stuff with Haskell on Unix then?

Presumably. I can't say I've tried it. There is an entire mailing list 
devoted to that topic though. I gather people have written algorithmic 
music composers, sound synthesizers, and all sorts of other crazy stuff 
in Haskell.

FWIW, it's not *impossible* to do graphics on Windows. I've done it. 
It's just more fiddly than it should be. (E.g., you have to install GTK 
first, and then compile Gtk2hs from source, and when you finally get it 
to work, all your applications look like Linux apps rather than native 
Windows apps...)

Post a reply to this message