On 2009-09-27 10:36 -0600 (Sun), John A. De Goes wrote: > I'm not sure what the point of your series is. No one who is using Java > now commercially can move to Haskell because Haskell doesn't run on the > JVM.
That's a rather strong statement, and I don't accept it. I can not only think of many possible circumstances where it would be possible for a Java-using shop to write a piece of software that doesn't run on the JVM, but I have sween many of these. There are lots of shops out there using, e.g., C++ code as well as Java code, who are already obviously able to use non-JVM languages. Given that, one point would be to show that there are more benefits to be gained by switching from Java to Haskell than there are from switching from Java to one of the other languages mentioned. This may be enough to tip some shops into Haskell. Second, it might inspire people to have a look at bringing a more Haskell-like language to the JVM, or add more Haskell-like features to existing JVM languages. Third, even if a shop is not going to switch, having people understand what's out there, and where many of these ideas come from, is a good thing, I feel. cjs -- Curt Sampson <[email protected]> +81 90 7737 2974 Functional programming in all senses of the word: http://www.starling-software.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
