------art_42194_6276373.1152451165636
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 7/9/06, Daniel Martin <martin / snowplow.org> wrote:
>
>
> I'm just curious; where does Haskell fit in this?  I think in this
> taxonomy it might fall under "lisp" because of the broad "functional"
> language category, but I've found that doing serious stuff in Haskell
> stretches my mind more than the bits of common lisp I've learned (but
> that's probably because I have never gotten heavily into CL macros).


Haskell is a strict, lazy functional language (and pretty close to the
state-of-the-art in computer languages, IMHO). As such it neatly fits the
Lisp category.

(those business analysts who are looking at this and thinking of right
> now mandating python use for everything are well advised to go
> (re-)read the book "Peopleware", and realize that developers having
> "fun" has very serious economic advantages)
>
>
I haven't met anyone working for a large or reasonably-large company
 who is thinking of mandating anything but Java. Python is generally
considered highly suspect and Ruby isn't on the radar at all. Ajax is seen
by many as a dangerous and subversive practice that must not be allowed to
take root. If you have examples to the contrary, I'd be really interested to
hear them.

If you follow the framework debates in the Java world, they've been talking
for months now about how heavyweight frameworks (which are still being
invented every other day, it seems) may be dying because of Ajax (read,
because of Rails). This obviously scares the hell out of people who have
invested heavily in Struts, Faces, and similar stuff.

------art_42194_6276373.1152451165636--