Interop between Haskell and Java is too difficult to be practical. And
I stand by my statement that no Java shop is going to switch over to
Haskell, precisely because they cannot afford to abandon either their
existing investment, or the _billions of dollars_ worth of commercial-
friendly open source libraries available for the Java platform.
But I do agree on this: the JVM does indeed need a Haskell-like
language.
Regards,
John A. De Goes
N-Brain, Inc.
The Evolution of Collaboration
http://www.n-brain.net | 877-376-2724 x 101
On Sep 27, 2009, at 8:10 PM, Curt Sampson wrote:
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
