Brandon S Allbery KF8NH <[email protected]> writes: > On 7/3/10 05:57 , Andrew Coppin wrote: >> Agreed. So let me rephrase: Why should _every_ Haskell library involve C? ;-) > > Who says they do, or should? AFAIK it's only done for the reasons I > mentioned (or, sometimes, for library compatibility; a native XCB library > has been considered, for example, but it wouldn't share state with the XCB > used by OpenGL, WxWindows, or gtk2hs (to name a few) so might have > interoperability problems). When possible pure Haskell is preferred, but > there's a lot of complex libraries out there that one should not try to > rewrite. Yes, i agree.
Let us make a GTK + example, why some popular languages such as Java, Python does not rewrite the GTK+? I think the key is not which language is best language to rewrite those *complex* library, the key is we need work together! That's why Haskell build FFI to work with other language. -- Andy _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
