<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3059" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left>Java sense (i.e. "cut out any feature that can't be
understood in five minutes by a chimp")</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=344245212-27042007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Got to love comments like this they
are constructive, objective, mature and accurate. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=344245212-27042007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=344245212-27042007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Glad we have your expert opinion to give us the gospel.
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=344245212-27042007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=344245212-27042007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Can I get an amen? How about a Hallelujah
?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=344245212-27042007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=344245212-27042007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Troy Taillefer Java chimpanzee</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT><BR> </DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> haskell-bounces@haskell.org
[mailto:haskell-bounces@haskell.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Sebastian
Sylvan<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:27 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
phiroc@free.fr<BR><B>Cc:</B> haskell@haskell.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re:
[Haskell] Newbie: what are the advantages of Haskell?<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>(note to Haskellers: Yeah, I'm handwaving things here, no need to
point out counter-examples to my generalisations!)<BR><BR>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 4/26/07, <B class=gmail_sendername><A
href="mailto:phiroc@free.fr">phiroc@free.fr</A></B> <<A
href="mailto:phiroc@free.fr">phiroc@free.fr</A>> wrote:<BR>We'll do this one
first:<BR><BR></SPAN>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px">What are the mysterious "side effects" which are
avoided by using Haskell, which <BR>everyone talks about? Null
pointers?<BR></DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote><BR>Side effects are usually things
like mutable state. In Haskell variables don't vary. "x=x+1" isn't valid in
Haskell. This means, among other things, that functions always do the same thing
given the same input (they can't depend on some mutable state changing value),
which is great since you'll never get those "oh I forgot that I must first call
foo before I call bar, or I'll get an error". This really is a HUGE win, since
programming with state is unreasonably error-prone. I'm afraid it's next to
impossible to convince anyone that this is true, unless they're willing to give
it a serious try, though :-) <BR><BR>Null pointers are possible when you're
dealing with C functions mostly. You don't use pointers in Haskell normally,
only when you're interfacing with external C libraries etc.<BR><BR></SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">Hello,<BR><BR>what
are the advantages of haskell over semi-functional programming
languages<BR>such as Perl, Common Lisp, etc.?</BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR>For me? Purity. I mean you can get plenty of the benefits of FP in any
old language (witness C# 3.0), but the one thing you can never get by just
adding support for a "functional style" in another language is purity. Once
purity is gone, it's gone! It can't be retrofitted on an existing
language.<BR><BR>Purity is great because it makes it much easier to write
programs without making silly mistakes. When writing programs in languages with
lots of side effects you have to sort of keep a "mental log" in your head for
all possible execution paths ("in this branch x is equal to y plus w, and this
pointer here is null in the other branch x is null and..."). For me I can quite
literally *feel* "brain resources" being freed up when using Haskell, which I
can use to get stuff done quicker (or probably more accurate: I can feel how
much brainpower I waste on book keeping and keeping track of this "mental log"
when using languages like C++). <BR><BR>Also purity is very interesting when you
want to paralellize programs (a pure function can be executed on any thread, at
any time, and its guaranteed to never interfer with the computation of other
functions -- in impure languages this doesn't hold at all!). This is probably
the killer app for functional programming IMO. FP is cool for a number of
reasons, but I think "isn't almost unusable in a multithreaded setting" is what
sets it apart the most from imperative languages. <BR><BR>Haskell also has STM
which is great for that low level shared state concurrency that you sometimes
need (no locks, monitors, or any of that non-composable, insanity-inducing,
messiness!)<BR> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid"><BR>Aren't
Haskell's advantages outweighed by its complexity (Monads, etc.)
and<BR>rigidity?</BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR>I can sometimes feel that Haskell looses out on not being user friendly
in the Java sense (i.e. "cut out any feature that can't be understood in five
minutes by a chimp"). Some things do take some effort to learn, but there is a
huge payoff for it (it's really powerful!). But yeah, there might be plenty of
folks who will never bother learning about them, and they won't understand your
code. <BR> </DIV></DIV><BR><BR clear=all><BR>-- <BR>Sebastian
Sylvan<BR>+44(0)7857-300802<BR>UIN: 44640862 </BODY></HTML>