python and haskell for fun
Kendall Clark
kendall at monkeyfist.com
Mon Mar 11 16:34:07 EST 2002
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Mon Mar 11 16:34:07 EST 2002
- Previous message (by thread): python and haskell for fun
- Next message (by thread): python and haskell for fun
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>>>>> "sandy" == Sandy Norton <sandskyfly at hotmail.com> writes: sandy> "Patrick" wrote: >> This subset of PASKELL will be clean, beautiful and functional. sandy> I'm sorry I wasn't clear. I meant 'beget a pretty monster' of sandy> an application, not a language. The last thing I would want sandy> to do is waste time discussing a new hybrid 'PASKELL' sandy> language... I've been daydreaming for about a year of a Python implementation written in Haskell, which would obviously make writing Python extensions in Haskell easier (and more elegant, IMO, than writing them in C or Java). However, John Paul Skaller did something similar with Ocaml, which he called Vyper, and that went over in the Py world like a leaden balloon -- actually it went over about as poorly as Stackless Python did; which does cause me to wonder what it is about Python culture, if anything, that's resistant to unusual alternative implementations?. A Python implementation in Haskell is probably a fool's task. Though given the various Haskell compilers, including some pretty impressive parallelizing stuff, it is an interesting idea. (Ocaml is pretty much Caml + objects; Caml is INRIA's implementation of ML; in the neighborhood of Haskell, but less syntactially elegant, IMO.) At least, a Haskell implementation of Python seems more practical than a Python implementation of Haskell, which would be rather toylike. But YMMV. Best, Kendall Clark
- Previous message (by thread): python and haskell for fun
- Next message (by thread): python and haskell for fun
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list