Mailing List Archive
tlug.jp Mailing List tlug archive tlug Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 13:31:35 +0100
- From: Attila Kinali <attila@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- References: <a63167770911010442pd642beco3268ed5c4a41d02@example.com> <20091102082821.GA28406@example.com> <a63167770911020112q1bd12b27ub5209902a971a6c9@example.com> <87hbtdtfch.fsf@example.com> <20091101131525.5f4312bd.attila@example.com> <a63167770911010442pd642beco3268ed5c4a41d02@example.com> <20091102082821.GA28406@example.com> <a63167770911020112q1bd12b27ub5209902a971a6c9@example.com> <20091102150646.GD16339@example.com> <20091103140253.7bf511a4.attila@example.com> <20091104060406.GE26028@example.com>
- Organization: NERV
Moin, On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:04:06 +0900 Curt Sampson <cjs@example.com> wrote: > On 2009-11-03 14:02 +0100 (Tue), Attila Kinali wrote: > > > Hmm.. didn't we had a discussion on STM just a few months ago? > > Yup. That, I believe, was before I'd learned about how STM works in C, > and so I didn't understand that the cool thing Haskell had was not STM > itself, but Haskell's type system that makes STM practical. I guess i have to see myself how Haskells STM looks like. I hope it's more a concept on how to do things than what a lot of CS-students/professors claim it to be, namely a way to do concurent work w/o locking, which it is definitly not. > > Now, that's interesting. I thought that functional languages hardly > > support iteration but "force" you to do it recusively? > > Pretty much anything you can express iteratively you can also express > recursively, and vice versa. So which you think in and which you really > use underneath depends on your language, compiler and libraries. That's obvious for anyone who's understood what recursion means :-) > Common lisp has various looping constructs, and the standard doesn't > require tail call optimization (though many compilers do provide it), > so a program that uses tail recursion over large data structures > or whatever is not guaranteed not to blow up the stack on some CL > implementations. (Scheme requires tail call optimization.) So that was > why I reckoned that CL encouraged looping rather than recursion, and why > I'm a little doubtful about Stephen's correction on that. But he would > probably know better than me. Hmm.. that raises a red flag here. From my background, ie number crunching applications (video coding) and deep embedded systems w/o OS, there is an absolute need to have a certain degree of control over how much memory on the heap and on the stack are used. Do functional languages allow such a control? > > What would you say about first learning Scheme and then going Haskell? > > Scheme has the very persuasive property of being compact which > > promises that i get a quick start and do the tedious learning of > > concepts as i walk along a nice path. > > I'd say don't bother, unless you intend to do some serious research > into programming with macros. I read from this, that Scheme has a different (better?) approach to macros than Haskell? > Haskell has marginally more syntax than > Scheme, but for learning the basics that Haskell and Scheme have in > common, the languages will be about equally easy to start with. Haskell > is quite as compact as Scheme, by the way, probably more so as you get > more sophisticated with it. That sounds good. Shall i wait until Travis did his talk or can i right now ask for a good introductory book on Haskell/functionall programming? :-) BTW: how do other functional languages, (like eg Erlang, OCaml,...) fit in here? Especially Erlangs claim to have special support for concurent programming sounds very persuasive. > > .o0(yet more expressions i've to look up before i can understand what's written there) > > All of this is stuff where, if you want to learn about it, you need to > sit down and study. I can't give you much more real insight into this > stuff in an e-mail message than I have already. That's why i didnt ask :-) I know i'm lacking a lot of understanding in this field and that it will take a lot of time to gain it. But then, it wouldnt be fun if i knew everything already ;-) Attila Kinali -- If you want to walk fast, walk alone. If you want to walk far, walk together. -- African proverb
- References:
- Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- From: Alan Busby
- Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- From: Curt Sampson
- Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- From: Alan Busby
- Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- From: Stephen J. Turnbull
- [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- From: Attila Kinali
- Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- From: Curt Sampson
- Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- From: Attila Kinali
- Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- From: Curt Sampson
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: [tlug] LVM2 and resizing partition
- Next by Date: Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- Previous by thread: Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- Next by thread: Re: [tlug] recomendations for a functional language
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links