From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3e1162e60811202134r6f074cdbo40328e19e123e5ba@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:34:12 -0800 From: "David Leimbach" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: <14ec7b180811202018o29788e71n396c8a43465869e5@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_62390_19811880.1227245652798" References: <881467ce0811200915odb0a042xb1c3aa2f292c2677@mail.gmail.com> <49259D0E.9050700@proweb.co.uk> <3e1162e60811201609x36cc0cf8i355f518eb9548643@mail.gmail.com> <1d5d51400811202011o34f305acte3704e653f916cfa@mail.gmail.com> <14ec7b180811202018o29788e71n396c8a43465869e5@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?] Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4df61d76-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 ------=_Part_62390_19811880.1227245652798 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:18 PM, andrey mirtchovski wrote: > I think that with a bit more work, porting the Ocaml native compiler > to Plan 9 would give you a bigger benefit than GHC (which is unwieldy) > or an interpreter such as Hugs. Having a higher-level language in > which to write native applications will, perhaps, give more people a > viable reason to explore the system. Ocaml's compiler generates > high-quality, reasonably fast code and a native port effort would be > much less than the one for a similar Haskell compiler. > > Just a thought. > > A perfectly reasonable one too... OCaml may increase in popularity now that F# is perhaps also picking up momentum, and they're both ML dialects. Dave ------=_Part_62390_19811880.1227245652798 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:18 PM, andrey mirtchovski <mirtchovski@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that with a bit more work, porting the Ocaml native compiler
to Plan 9 would give you a bigger benefit than GHC (which is unwieldy)
or an interpreter such as Hugs. Having a higher-level language in
which to write native applications will, perhaps, give more people a
viable reason to explore the system. Ocaml's compiler generates
high-quality, reasonably fast code and a native port effort would be
much less than the one for a similar Haskell compiler.

Just a thought.

A perfectly reasonable one too... OCaml may increase in popularity now that F# is perhaps also picking up momentum, and they're both ML dialects.

Dave
------=_Part_62390_19811880.1227245652798--