Functional - Re: shootout: implementing an interpreter for a simple procedural language Minim

Author

Re: shootout: implementing an interpreter for a simple procedural language Minim

Matthias Blume

2007-07-30, 7:07 pm

Rainer Joswig <joswig@lisp.de> writes:

> ML is from when? Haskell is from when? The improvement
> of ML over time is also only a small delta of features.
> I just read the web page of Successor ML and was not
> overwhelmed in terms of value what it means for
> programmers.

Do you have any first-hand experience (or any experience at all for
that matter) of "what it means for programmers"?

I'm not sure how seriously I should take anything you say. Have you
ever used ML (or similar languages) for anything bigger than a toy
project? Or for any project at all? Or are you just reading some web
pages and don't get overwhelmed because they don't match your
long-held opinions?

You talk about di

vantages of static typing in a way that is almost
180 degrees opposite of what I have experienced. For example, the
notion that type inference gets you the worst of both worlds is IMO
completely ridiculous.

So, please, tell me: Why should I listen to your opinion on static
type systems?

Sponsored Links