[OT] pugs

[Martin DeMello]

http://pugscode.org/

Pugs is a project to implement the Perl6 spec in Haskell. From their
FAQ:

Why did you choose Haskell?

Many Perl 6 features have similar counterparts in Haskell: Perl 6 Rules
corresponds closely to Parsec; lazy list evaluation is common in both
languages; continuation support can be modeled with the ContT monad
transformer, and so on. This greatly simplified the prototyping effort:
the first working interpreter was released within the first week, and by
the third week we have a full-fledged Test.pm module for unit testing.

The ultimate aim is to bootstrap a self-hosting perl6 implementation.
Interesting stuff - well worth a look.

martin

[djbe...@gmail.com]

An interesting academic exercise. However, one of the things I like
about Ruby is that I can read and (usually) understand the underlying
source code. That allows me to submit patches when I find a bug.

Many folks know C. Relatively few know Haskell. Better hope there
aren't any bugs. :)

Regards,

Dan

[Martin DeMello]

djbe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> An interesting academic exercise. However, one of the things I like
> about Ruby is that I can read and (usually) understand the underlying
> source code. That allows me to submit patches when I find a bug.
>
> Many folks know C. Relatively few know Haskell. Better hope there
> aren't any bugs. :)

Hey - Haskell's a neat language :) It'd be an incentive to learn it if
nothing else.

martin

[Shashank Date]

+1

> martin
-- shanko

[Csaba Henk]

On 2005-03-05, Martin DeMello <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://pugscode.org/
>
> Pugs is a project to implement the Perl6 spec in Haskell. From their

Once I bumped into it. What they want to implement, Isn't it just the
functional fragment of perl6?

Csaba

[Csaba Henk]

On 2005-03-05, djbe...@gmail.com <djbe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> An interesting academic exercise. However, one of the things I like
> about Ruby is that I can read and (usually) understand the underlying
> source code. That allows me to submit patches when I find a bug.
>
> Many folks know C. Relatively few know Haskell. Better hope there
> aren't any bugs. :)

Maybe more people can report if the interpreter is written in C;
however, if the interpreter is written in Haskell, no need of
error-catching eyes for memory leaks and buffer overflows...

Maybe less people are competent for bug reporting; on the other hand,
a higher-level language can make core development much more easy and
fast. Ignorance as an argument doens't take you anywhere.

I think it's a good choice to use a compiled language which is higher
level than C (unless this makes performance dropping by magnitudes,
which I think is avoidable). I don't buy the "exotic languages suck"
argument. Would I use ruby otherwise? :)

Read some Paul Graham :)

Csaba

[djbe...@gmail.com]

No. If someone wrote a Ruby spec in Haskell, THAT would be an
incentive. :)

Dan