From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Let's get functional? From: "Russ Cox" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 11:52:31 -0400 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8cffc8ae-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > Haskell is in the same ballpark with ML, but has a somewhat bigger > following. I admit I didn't think of ML when I asked the question, but > seeing how often it is used within Plan9 (outside bell-labs at least) pretty > much answers my question about needing to bring yet another functional > language here... if you want to play with Haskell, by all means port it. i didn't port ML to write better Plan 9 programs. i ported ML so i could use Plan 9 to work on a project that was written in ML. but you're right not to entertain notions that somehow if we had ML or Haskell we'd write half our scripts in it. they just don't lend themselves easily to such things. for some kinds of big programs, they're great.