Yes, but in 5 minutes I take it they won't have time to ask questions before your presentation is over.<br><br>I haven't thought about parallel computing but it's one of the many assets of the language.<br>The problem IMHO with STM is that it relies on too many Haskell elements to be grasped in 5 minutes. Monads, Monoids, you name it. You can't still present it, but bare in mind people will just understand the vague idea.<br>
There are so many cool things to show... ;). (But that's true for any expressive language)<br><br>Oh, BTW I'm coming to the Battle Language tonight.<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2012/2/28 Arnaud Bailly <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:arnaud.oqube@gmail.com" target="_blank">arnaud.oqube@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thanks for your support. I would really like to do this but 1) the talk is tomorrow evening and 2) I do not have time in the interval to learn yesod and/or gloss enough to be confident that I will not botch anything in a 5 minutes time frame. <br>
<br>I did recently a 2-hours long talk with same purpose (introducing Haskell to an audience of mixed-level Scala programmers), using some code to produce sound and music, up to a web server for generating wav files from "scores", and I had to make giant steps in the last 15 minutes to get to the web stuff. There was a lot of questions right from the start on various "strange" aspects of the language : type inference, laziness, generalized tail recursion, monadic I/O, point-free definitions and I barely managed to keep some time to show how easy it is to write a web server with simple HTML combinators (I discovered miku in the process). <br>
<br>I timed myself on the menu problem and I am a little bit under 5 minutes, given I want to explain quite a few things in the process: what you can do with lists, what you can do with pairs, how to simply generate all the combinations of elements of a list, how to map a function on list, how to use list-comprehensions to integrate everything into a concise form and how to avoid combinatorial blow-up through laziness.<br>
<br>I also would love to have the time to show some cool concurrency stuff following your suggestion. I will try to pack this tomorrow.<br><br>Thanks a lot again for your advices,<br><br>Arnaud<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
2012/2/28 Ertugrul Söylemez <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:es@ertes.de" target="_blank">es@ertes.de</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div><div>
Arnaud Bailly <<a href="mailto:arnaud.oqube@gmail.com" target="_blank">arnaud.oqube@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Thanks Yves for your advice. And I agree with you that too much<br>
> laziness may be mind-blowing for most of the audience, yet this is one<br>
> of the characteristics of Haskell, whether or not we like it and<br>
> whatever troubles it can induce.<br>
><br>
> I really think the knapsack is simple, not too far away from real<br>
> world and might be demonstrated with live code in 5 minutes. I will<br>
> have a look anyway at more "spectacular" stuff like gloss or yesod but<br>
> I fear this is out of scope.<br>
<br>
</div>Gloss is definitely not out of scope. It is to simple 2D graphics what<br>
Yesod is to web applications. I write two-minutes visualizations using<br>
it all the time. Of course if you want to show something great, you<br>
shouldn't fear learning it first.<br>
<br>
Also showing the language features, despite their greatness, makes<br>
people go like: "Ok, that's great, but I can do it in my language using<br>
<insert control construct here>". If you really don't want to go for<br>
something amazing like Diagrams, Gloss or Yesod, I really suggest at<br>
least bringing the run-time system into the game. Show concurrency, STM<br>
and parallel evaluation. Show how you can write a full-featured finger<br>
server in five minutes that is fast, secure and amazingly readable.<br>
Something like that.<br>
<br>
Math problems amaze Haskellers, not programmers in general. Show how<br>
Haskell solves practical problems, for which there is no simple solution<br>
in more common languages. Don't show why Haskell is also good. Show<br>
why Haskell is /a lot better/.<br>
<div><div><br>
<br>
Greets,<br>
Ertugrul<br>
<br>
--<br>
nightmare = unsafePerformIO (getWrongWife >>= sex)<br>
<a href="http://ertes.de/" target="_blank">http://ertes.de/</a><br>
</div></div><br></div></div><div>_______________________________________________<br>
Haskell-Cafe mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org" target="_blank">Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe</a><br>
<br></div></blockquote></div><br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Haskell-Cafe mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org" target="_blank">Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>