4 ms·
Go is impoverished compared to Haskell but not when it comes to concurrency. The Haskell analogues for these concurrency primitives seem laborious...and they we
by junkscience2017 9y ago
Go is impoverished compared to Haskell but not when it comes to concurrency. The Haskell analogues for these concurrency primitives seem laborious...and they were even moreso prior to the advent of the `async` library.
- Tehnix 9y agoA commenter on /r/haskell[0] noted that there is actually a library that mimics Go Channels a bit closer, called GoChan[1]. That said, I think `async` is the idiomatic choice, so it probably makes more sense to keep it. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/7ilhb9/a_tour_of_go_in_haskell/ https://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/7ilhb9/a_tour_of_g... [1] https://hackage.haskell.org/package/gochan-0.0.2/docs/Control-Concurrent-GoChan.html https://hackage.haskell.org/package/gochan-0.0.2/docs/Contro...
- bjoli 9y agoWhich is strange. It should be possible to implement proper CML-style concurrency in Haskell, which is strictly more expressive than the go concurrency model.