And Haskell embedded a logical programming language on accident.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/15/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Manuel M T Chakravarty</b> <<a href="mailto:chak@cse.unsw.edu.au">chak@cse.unsw.edu.au
</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Dan Piponi wrote,<br>> On 10/12/07, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH <<a href="mailto:allbery@ece.cmu.edu">
allbery@ece.cmu.edu</a>> wrote:<br>><br>>> He wants to write entire programs in the type system,<br>>> something like the crazies who write programs in C++ templates such<br>>> that template expansion does all the work at compile time
<br>><br>> Crazies? :-)<br>> <a href="http://homepage.mac.com/sigfpe/Computing/peano.html">http://homepage.mac.com/sigfpe/Computing/peano.html</a><br>><br>> Having switched from C++ to Haskell (at least in my spare time) I
<br>> thought I'd escaped that kind of type hackery but it seems to be<br>> following me...<br><br>The way I see, we are trying to come up with a clean way of<br>providing type-level computations (ie, we use and extend the
<br>standard theory of HM type systems). C++ embedded a functional<br>language in the type systems mostly by accident, whereas we do it on<br>purpose.<br><br>Manuel<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Haskell-Cafe mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org">Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org</a><br><a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe</a>
<br></blockquote></div><br>