On 4/20/2012 0:57, Invisible wrote:
>>> When will we see the Haskell# language?
>>
>> I'm pretty sure the whole .NET bit is too OO to make that useful.There's
>> way too much stateful stuff (like I/O) that you'd want to use from .NET
>> to make it reasonable to have a purely function .net language.
>
> Haskell already supports a wide range of I/O operations. That's pretty
> stateful, and it's not a problem.
>
> Yeah, if you wanted to talk to the .NET libraries, it would all end up being
> monadic. (Even the .NET stuff that's actually pure - since it isn't /marked/
> as pure.) But it would still work fine.
>
> I think it's probably vacuous to try to estimate how "useful" it would be
> without actually trying it...

Well, they tried making STM work on .NET and gave up because of all the 
state, if you remember.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
   "Don't panic. There's beans and filters
    in the cabinet."

Post a reply to this message