http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3563/microsoft_excel_revolutionary_3d_.php

While this may be pushing it a bit far, Excel is actually useful for doing a 
lot more than most people realise...

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

> While this may be pushing it a bit far, Excel is actually useful for 
> doing a lot more than most people realise...

Excel is a first-order functional programming language with a 
sophisticated UI. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v7 wrote:

> Excel is a first-order functional programming language with a 
> sophisticated UI. ;-)

Now, just imagine if Excel would use Haskell instead of VB - you could 
use the same language for the cell formulas and the macros! :-D

Hmm, pitty it'll never happen...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

47d4ff20@news.povray.org...
> Hmm, pitty it'll never happen...

Now here's a new challenge for you:
http://neilmitchell.blogspot.com/2007/03/hsexcel.html

G.


-- 
*****************************
http://www.oyonale.com
*****************************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray, Cinema 4D and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

> 47d4ff20@news.povray.org...
>> Hmm, pitty it'll never happen...
> 
> Now here's a new challenge for you:
> http://neilmitchell.blogspot.com/2007/03/hsexcel.html

Heh. I know almost nothing about VBA, so...

I've also often wished that GNU Plot used Haskell as it's function 
definition language - that would be so much more flexible! (Although the 
static typing might get tedious...)

I think perhaps the big problem is that Haskell (unlike many "scripting 
languages") lacks a nice simple interpretter that's easy to call from 
anywhere.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> 
> Now, just imagine if Excel would use Haskell instead of VB - you could 
> use the same language for the cell formulas and the macros! :-D
> 

Actually I'd say you can do that with VBA too. Just create a function 
that passes the input to VBA translator.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

>> Now, just imagine if Excel would use Haskell instead of VB - you could 
>> use the same language for the cell formulas and the macros! :-D
>>
> 
> Actually I'd say you can do that with VBA too. Just create a function 
> that passes the input to VBA translator.

Right. And what non-trivial operations can you perform with a snippet of 
VBA small enough to resonably fit into a single cell?

Yeah, exactly.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> 
> Right. And what non-trivial operations can you perform with a snippet of 
> VBA small enough to resonably fit into a single cell?

Depends on A) what you're doing and B) what functions for VBA you have 
pre-made. Would the 1024 (oslt) char limit on Excel cell would be 
seriously more usable with plain Haskell?

> Yeah, exactly.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

>> Right. And what non-trivial operations can you perform with a snippet 
>> of VBA small enough to resonably fit into a single cell?
> 
> Depends on A) what you're doing and B) what functions for VBA you have 
> pre-made. Would the 1024 (oslt) char limit on Excel cell would be 
> seriously more usable with plain Haskell?

Well let's put it this way. If you wanted to calculate the geometric 
mean (assuming there isn't already a function for that), in VBA you'd 
have to write an explicit FOR loop (with initialisation, update, etc.), 
whereas in Haskell you'd just keep a "map" call... It's a 1-liner.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>
>> Depends on A) what you're doing and B) what functions for VBA you have 
>> pre-made. Would the 1024 (oslt) char limit on Excel cell would be 
>> seriously more usable with plain Haskell?
> 
> Well let's put it this way. If you wanted to calculate the geometric 
> mean (assuming there isn't already a function for that), in VBA you'd 
> have to write an explicit FOR loop (with initialisation, update, etc.), 
> whereas in Haskell you'd just keep a "map" call... It's a 1-liner.
> 

Meaning that you have pre-done function/call for it in Haskell (no, it 
doesn't have to be self-made, it just is implemented earlier, usually 
since someone has needed it).

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message