Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Turing Complete, was Re: [extremeperl] Logic Programming in Perl -- Just say no

Expand Messages
  • Rob Kinyon
    ... I don t know if this is going to become a habit, but I m with Rob on this one. Not because I think Haskell is useless or that FP is useless. (My posts on
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 5, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      > Not interested. I haven't found a problem that I needed Haskell to
      > solve. When I do, I'll sign up.

      I don't know if this is going to become a habit, but I'm with Rob on
      this one. Not because I think Haskell is useless or that FP is
      useless. (My posts on Perlmonks should be proof enough of that!) And,
      I'm also not saying that Perl is the be-all-end-all of programming
      languages ... Paul Graham's Blub, so to speak.

      What I am saying is that I have solved with Perl all the problems I
      have run into since learning Perl. This isn't to say I couldn't have
      used Haskell (or something else) nor am I saying that Haskell wouldn't
      have been a better choice. I'm saying Perl has been an adequate
      choice.

      Now, I'm not a Perl-only bigot. I'm happily delving into Javascript
      (which is more FP than Perl). I just don't have the tuits to learn a
      language that I can't give excuses for right now to my wife.
      Javascript lets me play with Ajax. P6 ... I'd love to get on that
      train, but I can't get side-contracts with it ... yet.

      I'm also considering a way to make coderefs a first-class datatype in
      Perl the way they are in Haskell or Lisp. But, I need to think some
      more, first.

      Rob
    • Curtis Poe
      ... The difference here is that you admit that other languages may be superior choices for things but you don t have the tuits to to learn them. You
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 5, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        On Apr 5, 2005, at 5:22 AM, Rob Kinyon wrote:

        > >  Not interested.  I haven't found a problem that I needed Haskell to
        > >  solve.  When I do, I'll sign up.
        >
        > I don't know if this is going to become a habit, but I'm with Rob on
        > this one. Not because I think Haskell is useless or that FP is
        > useless.

        <snip>

        The difference here is that you admit that other languages may be
        superior choices for things but you don't have the tuits to to learn
        them. You came off sounding reasonable in this email.

        Nagler's comment, on the other hand, was a real howler. I've said some
        pretty stupid things in my time and while it's painful to do, I
        frequently come around to admitting it. In the long run, it doesn't
        help me to say stupid things, but publicly admitting when I'm wrong
        buys me credibility. (Publicly saying things like this possibly hurts
        that credibility, though)

        Cheers,
        Ovid
      • Rob Nagler
        ... In other words, you have a technical problem that your customer doesn t want to pay for. :-) ... Please keep us informed on this list. To the people who
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 5, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Rob Kinyon writes:
          > I just don't have the tuits to learn a
          > language that I can't give excuses for right now to my wife.

          In other words, you have a technical problem that your customer
          doesn't want to pay for. :-)

          > I'm also considering a way to make coderefs a first-class datatype in
          > Perl the way they are in Haskell or Lisp. But, I need to think some
          > more, first.

          Please keep us informed on this list.

          To the people who think they were going to convert somebody to
          Haskell: When I say I haven't found a problem that I couldn't solve in
          Perl, I am saying that Perl is good enough. It isn't saying Perl is a
          hammer (or a swiss army chainsaw ;-), or that I haven't learned by
          working on projects in other languages. It merely states that Perl
          contains all the abstractions I have needed to solve the
          problems I have thus far encountered.

          Suppose that I was building hard real-time systems. Perl is missing
          some fundamental abstractions to help me get there. Undoubtedly, I
          would encounter a problem that Perl didn't handle well. At that
          point, I would hit CPAN, which probably wouldn't help in this case. I
          might decide to add time constraints to Perl subroutines. The process
          model would depend on the deployment platform, but there probably
          would be an API for that, which Perl would allow me to attach to very
          easily. This is how any XP programmer should start out. Otherwise,
          it's not XP.

          Would I be re-inventing the wheel? No. I would be doing what I do on
          a daily basis: trading off build vs buy. Or, if you prefer, time
          vs. space (money). Does Haskell contain interesting concepts? Yup.
          However, the concepts are trivial to copy into Perl. If they weren't,
          there wouldn't be so many different functional programming languages
          out there.

          I have written a variety of operating systems. Some would say that
          Perl is not suited to the task. They are possibly right, but then
          again nobody has tried afaik. It's not something you are supposed to
          do.

          Recently, someone was asked in a talk: how would you use XP to build
          an operating system? Having built an operating system in a very
          iterative fashion, I would argue it's been done already. You start
          with the simplest thing that could possibly work, say context
          switching, for one computer. You then expand from there. Remember
          that Linux was PC only until a couple of years ago. Everybody thought
          Linus was building a non-portable, monolith, but now Linux is one of
          the most robust and most portable operating systems in the world. I
          would argue it's probably the only operating system you need!

          More fodder for the global conspiracy. :-)

          Rob
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.