Received: from spf3.us4.outblaze.com (spf3.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.25]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iA8FHV61027589 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:17:32 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf3.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7116254A8F for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:09:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CRBHF-0001Z1-6j for migo@homemail.com; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 10:17:53 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CRBGr-0001Yv-6j for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 10:17:29 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CRBGq-0001Yj-Q0 for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 10:17:28 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CRBGq-0001Yg-Nc for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 10:17:28 -0500 Received: from [83.216.134.182] (helo=cyclone.suffields.me.uk) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CRB8T-0000q2-4Z for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 10:08:49 -0500 Received: from asuffield by cyclone.suffields.me.uk with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1CRB8S-0001Wa-00 for ; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 15:08:48 +0000 Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:08:48 +0000 From: Andrew Suffield To: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla Message-ID: <20041108150847.GB4720@suffields.me.uk> Mail-Followup-To: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org References: <20041107234609.7bf0abfe@delta.hk.office.outblaze.com> <877jowbl8w.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <1099920390.31269.11.camel@pc1117> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1099920390.31269.11.camel@pc1117> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i X-BeenThere: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: a discussion list for all things arch-ish List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1123395553==" Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Status: RO Content-Length: 3713 Lines: 99 --===============1123395553== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Pd0ReVV5GZGQvF3a" Content-Disposition: inline --Pd0ReVV5GZGQvF3a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 01:26:37PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, 2004-11-08 at 12:03, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > Haskell is no harder than Lisp in principle, and if you'll go back in > > this list a bit you'll find a thread on Lisp and parentheses where > > asuffield makes a really convincing case (to me, anyway) that > > Haskell's presentation with minimal parentheses plus the "offsides > > rule" is far more readable than Lisp. I think it's reasonable to > > suppose that people who want to help with darcs can learn enough > > Haskell to do so. >=20 > Maybe Haskell is no harder than LISP but if you only have an imperative > programming background, it is harder to switch to Haskell. At least LISP > allows imperative programming. What's even harder, it is a pure > functional language. If anything, pure functional languages are easier than impure ones. And you actually can do imperative programming in Haskell (that's a good non-technical definition of what a monad is), but you have to understand functional programming first. Empirical observation: it takes approximately two weeks of lectures to kick an imperative programmer into thinking in the correct terms for Haskell (it was the first language taught in my freshman class at university; you could almost measure it by timing the groans). > > Please confirm it's possible to compile darcs, and which compiler you > > used. I heard recently that darcs is strongly dependent on Hugs98, > > which is an interpreter. Seemed a little odd (Haskell98 is a > > well-defined language, and Hugs doesn't have all that much in the way > > of extensions), but that's what I heard. >=20 > Darcs is compiled with ghc (Glasgow Haskell compiler). There is an > ongoing thread on the darcs-user list about using darcs with the Linux > kernel - > http://www.abridgegame.org/pipermail/darcs-users/2004-November/thread.htm= l#4021 A little extract from this thread: "The initial record is the command which most stresses darcs' memory, as it requires holding the entire tree in parsed and in memory." That sort of thing is why darcs is slow. Optimising Haskell programs is more or less equally difficult as optimising C programs (functional languages are not inherently any easier or harder to optimise), and the problems are pretty much the same. tla even has analogous issues (it tackles this problem differently, and I think does a little better in the amortised case, but it's far from optimal). --=20 .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- | --Pd0ReVV5GZGQvF3a Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBj4v/lpK98RSteX8RAtMPAJ9aovKdKftFCeLoWZtKUCk4yVyb+QCfQEw8 7H6ARhdpJOV8FB4CU6zQRMU= =ElS0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Pd0ReVV5GZGQvF3a-- --===============1123395553== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/ --===============1123395553==--