4 ms·
> The aversion to Haskell is so severe that when we discussed a hardware style here at Google, one person suggested banning any Haskell based solution ...curio
by nnq 13y ago
> The aversion to Haskell is so severe that when we discussed a hardware style here at Google, one person suggested banning any Haskell based solution
...curious, but why would folks in this field even care about what programming language is this based on? Theoretically abusing the concept, wouldn't you just use something Brainfuck based if you found a nice way to describe your hardware using some BF based software and DSL? Most attributes of programming languages that we software guys care about seem irrelevant at this level, so Haskell or C or Lisp, why would it matter?
- raverbashing 13y agoWell, because some languages are harder. Haskell is a tough nut to crack (especially the "Monad" thing, but the type system also gives some question marks as well) Yeah, functional languages are closer to what hardware does, but more importantly, they may be close but not close enough As the example showed, you have several side effects. Combinational logic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinational_logic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinational_logic) is a very good match to functional languages, however Sequential logic is "very different" (from an analysis point of view)