[9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[Giacomo Tesio]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 680 bytes --]

I'm completely new to Functional Languages (actually I'm not understanding
whether they are useful in real world, or just to enance ones mind).

But I'm studing Haskell, and I saw that it was ported to Plan 9.

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.


Giacomo
PS: stream of consciousness was: limbo -> erlang (which I took a look) ->
haskell


On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Sergey Zhilkin <szhilkin@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> 2008/11/19 Nolan Hamilton <nolan.h.hamilton@gmail.com>
>
>> Can people still use Alef?, if so how can I get my hands on it.
>
>
> People use Limbo.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1275 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[Roman Zhukov]

On my opinion, those "big" languages (haskell, erlang, lisp, etc.)
don't fit to Plan9 or any other os/environment, because they usually
provide their own.

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Giacomo Tesio <giacomo@tesio.it> wrote:
> I'm completely new to Functional Languages (actually I'm not understanding
> whether they are useful in real world, or just to enance ones mind).
>
> But I'm studing Haskell, and I saw that it was ported to Plan 9.
>
> 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.
>
>
> Giacomo
> PS: stream of consciousness was: limbo -> erlang (which I took a look) ->
> haskell

--
Roma

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[matt]

>>
>> 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.

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[Gorka Guardiola]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Giacomo Tesio <giacomo@tesio.it> wrote:
> I'm completely new to Functional Languages (actually I'm not understanding
> whether they are useful in real world, or just to enance ones mind).
>
> But I'm studing Haskell, and I saw that it was ported to Plan 9.
>
> 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.
>
>
> Giacomo
> PS: stream of consciousness was: limbo -> erlang (which I took a look) ->
> haskell
>

Some time ago I ported gofer (a predecessor to haskell) to Plan 9 (APE) for
my use. I liked it because it was simpler than haskell. We used it for a while
in some autoconfiguration things in Plan B and I used it for math stuff
I was doing. If you are interested in getting it drop me a line.
--
- curiosity sKilled the cat

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[Iruata Souza]

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

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[John Barham]

> 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.

Lua (http://www.lua.org/) is also a good choice as its standard
library is so minimalist that porting it is trivial.  IIRC there is an
APE port somewhere in contrib.

  John

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[Federico G. Benavento]

yes, it's in nils contrib (noselasd)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 6:47 PM, John Barham <jbarham@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Lua (http://www.lua.org/) is also a good choice as its standard
> library is so minimalist that porting it is trivial.  IIRC there is an
> APE port somewhere in contrib.
>
>  John
>
>



--
Federico G. Benavento

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[Iruata Souza]

in my contrib there is a more up-to-date lua port

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:13 PM, Federico G. Benavento
<benavento@gmail.com> wrote:
> yes, it's in nils contrib (noselasd)
>
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 6:47 PM, John Barham <jbarham@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> Lua (http://www.lua.org/) is also a good choice as its standard
>> library is so minimalist that porting it is trivial.  IIRC there is an
>> APE port somewhere in contrib.
>>
>>  John
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Federico G. Benavento
>
>



--
iru

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1424 bytes --]

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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1980 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[Fernan Bolando]

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

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[andrey mirtchovski]

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.

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1885 bytes --]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Fernan Bolando <fernanbolando@mailc.net>wrote:

> 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
>

Honestly I hadn't thought about that one too much, but I think that that'd
be fun to try.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2816 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?]

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 751 bytes --]

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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1031 bytes --]