[Haskell-cafe] Channel9 Interview: Software Composability and theFu ture of Languages

[Bulat Ziganshin]

Hello Steve,

Friday, January 26, 2007, 10:03:09 PM, you wrote:

> Haskell _is_ hard, although I don't think it's _too_ hard, or I wouldn't
...

> The audience for programming languages like Haskell is always going to
> be small, because it appeals to those who want to understand how the TV
> works,

i don't think so :)  imho, we just don't have good _teachers_. in
70's, OOP audience was also small, but it was popularized later and
now every student know about polymorphism via inheritance. but most of
OOP programmers don't reinvent the wheels, they just use "patterns"
described in OOP bestselling books

i have a positive experience of making "complex" concepts easy and
available for wide audience ([1]-[5]), [1] was even used to teach
students in some college. and i guess that good Haskell books, such as
yaht and printed ones, also make it easy to learn Haskell. but we need
to gather much more attention to Haskell to make it as "patternized"
as structured-programming and OOP. _nowadays_ there is no even one
"advanced Haskell" or "Haskell in Real World" book and this means that
anyone who want to learn Haskell in deep should study those terrible papers

(well, it's very like higher education in Russia - no one really
teaches you at our colleges so you should either learn yourself or die :)
but this means that at least whose who still alive, are Real Machos :)

the same apply to Haskell - now the only way to learn it is to learn
yourself, so we all definitely are cool mans. once i even got C# job
offer only because i know Haskell :)


[1] http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/IO_inside
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/OOP_vs_type_classes
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Modern_array_libraries
http://haskell.org/bz/th3.htm
http://haskell.org/bz/thdoc.htm

-- 
Best regards,
 Bulat                            mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com