On 11/21/08, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Iruata Souza <iru.muzgo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:23 PM, matt <mattmobile@proweb.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> Without starting a flame war, I'd like to know if some of you think it
>> >>> could
>> >>> be useful on a Plan 9 grid/environment.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> > I've often though quite a few languages could be shrunken down fit with
>> > Plan9's diretory/files system. Python, for instance, would need much
>> > less
>> > code for networking etc.
>> >
>> > So a language that specialsed in I/O primitives would be a good choice.
>> That
>> > doesn't sound like Haskell to me. I/O is about changing state. That
>> > said,
>> > there must be a way to make it fit :)
>> >
>> > Of the few I have used, I think python is the best hybrid that fits.
>> >
>>
>> once in a while I play with fgb's port of tinyscheme and it seems to
>> fit for the pretty simple stuff I do. just for fun, I started adding
>> some Plan 9 native calls to tinyscheme and it worked nicely.
>>
>> iru
>>
>
> I've been doing a lot with both Haskell and Erlang these days...
>
> I'm also impressed by the rich Haskell library and that the binaries, even
> on linux, tend to only depend on libc once built for "deployment".  Well
> that's true with GHC anyway, but porting GHC to Plan 9 might take a serious
> step back in time to bootstrap the C sources all the way back up to the
> current version.
>
> Dave
>

what about nhc98?

--
http://www.fernski.com