On 7/9/06, Francis Cianfrocca <garbagecat10 / gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.

Boeing's recognized that Python has significant advantages over Java
for some things.  The company certainly isn't mandating Java.

Joe