3 ms·
I dont think Haskell is suitable. In fact there are very few languages that are. The reason is you need dependent types in order to compete with VHDL when it co
by audunw 12y ago
I dont think Haskell is suitable. In fact there are very few languages that are. The reason is you need dependent types in order to compete with VHDL when it comes to type safety. I only know of two general purpose languages that support that, Idris and Nimrod (kinda.. Its coming along).
Your work sounds interesting. Contact me at skyfex@gmail.com if you want to exchange more ideas
- tluyben2 12y agoMaybe we can open some group for this discussion. Anyway; email in my HN profile if you want to exchange ideas as well.
- 14113 12y agoI agree that haskell isn't smart enough, but I think it's a step in the right direction, in that a lot of constructs seem geared to abstracting away the details of how to perform certain computations, and more about describing what a computation should perform.