7 ms·
Your argument is that a language with a 750,000 line implementation and a zillion features is simple because one of its IRs is simple? Doesn't seem very convinc
by seagreen 7y ago
Your argument is that a language with a 750,000 line implementation and a zillion features is simple because one of its IRs is simple? Doesn't seem very convincing.
- danharaj 7y agoHaskell2010's definition is like 20 pages long and that includes the definition of the standard library. This core accounts for 90-99% of the code in project that isn't going out of its way to use fancy features for the lulz.
- seagreen 7y agoName me a single company that uses Haskell 2010. It's completely irrelevant. But I'll leave you to argue with Vitaly Bragilevsky (speaking at Galois): "Haskell is a big language" -- https://galois.com/blog/2018/11/teaching-haskell-in-the-real-world/ https://galois.com/blog/2018/11/teaching-haskell-in-the-real... Or Paul Hudak, Philip Wadler, and Simon Peyton Jones: "Haskell is a big language" -- https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/history.pdf https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/... (p.28) Maybe those guys know something. It's cool Haskell goes through a small IR. That doesn't make TH, rewrite rules, CPP, the million extensions, STG, the runtime, the gigantic syntax, or the quarter million SLOC implementation simple.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]