>> I was referring only to the design of the language itself, not the
>> libraries that go with it, nor any of the various other tools required
>> to make a language generally useful. It's no secret that Haskell fails
>> spectacularly on that count.
>
> I'm reiterating: I don't doubt that the Haskell /core language/ is
> simple and elegant. I doubt that it "solves everything".

It solves every problem of core application logic. It doesn't solve the 
problem of talking to the outside world. (That's the job of the 
libraries, and once they currently don't do so well.)

> As soon as you've dealt with the "solves everything" part, we'll talk
> again, and see if the "simple and elegant" also applies to that one. My
> claim is that the combo isn't possible.
>
> THAT is the point I'm trying to get through to you.

You somehow believe that writing a bunch of libraries would make the 
language no longer elegant?

Well, I guess since it's unlikely to ever happen, we'll never know...

Post a reply to this message