Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm certain that it's impossible to separate out the PhD Effect from the Language Effect entirely. I'm also certain that the Language Effect is non-zero. I'm finally pretty confident that there's an interaction, the Language-Lets-You-Hire-PhDs-More-Easily Effect, that's in play.

I don't think PHP is an apt comparison because much of this presentation is actually honing in on very particular points of Haskell-the-language which are directly benefitting SC in practice. SC's use of Mu doesn't detract from this either---both Mu and GHC implement Haskell-the-language (to a large degree) and the core benefits they speak of are exactly those within Haskell-the-language.

Now, SC needed some extra advantages: portable code seems to be a big one as well as dramatic cross-compatibility. These are compiler features more than Haskell-the-language features and so they wrote Mu.

I think the point about Erlang is awesome. I think Haskell could learn a lot from Erlang... and frankly also improve upon its safety and readability tremendously using types. That's a personal bet.

I don't think Dialyzer is even a slightly acceptable replacement for the language advantages of Haskell, however. They are not even playing the same game.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: