4 ms·

Some people don't believe in tweaking GC's. I've heard horror stories from people who tried it on the JVM. (And I have made terrible experiences with JVM's GC,

Some people don't believe in tweaking GC's. I've heard horror stories from people who tried it on the JVM. (And I have made terrible experiences with JVM's GC, but never tried tuning). Some people don't believe that extremist functional languages are needed (depending on the domain). Validation. Oh, well. I think you propose Haskell, and it might disqualify for an NTP daemon, for example in terms of debuggability (stack traces?).

nathyong 10y ago
A more relevant point that would disqualify Haskell is the fact that its runtime (or rather, the GHC's runtime) is nowhere near predictable enough for the realtime guarantees that time synchronisation software would require. A Haskell DSL that outputs some safer low-level code would be a more likely choice (for example http://hackage.haskell.org/package/atom http://hackage.haskell.org/package/atom), but Rust is both more popular and has more commercial support.
- jstimpfle 10y ago
  When opting for a DSL that compiles to low-level the "Haskell" part is less important. I've heard the idea of DSLs over and over again, but who actually does that? I know of course of sed, awk, regex, etc but what part of NTPsec is narrow enough in scope and large enough in volume to justify creating a DSL? (just asking -- I'm not familiar with NTPsec).
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    Companies that like consistently getting results. Example: http://ivorylang.org/ivory-introduction.html http://ivorylang.org/ivory-introduction.html
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]