[pphysch]

Last time I checked, everything is still running on von Neumann/Harvard CPUs. Did I miss a major revolution in computing?

[gmfawcett]

Forgive the tangent, but your comment reminded me of item #52 on the venerable "Things to say when you're losing a technical argument" list. :)

http://web.archive.org/web/20050131033632/http://www.skirsch...

[pphysch]

Yikes.

[marcosdumay]

Yes, nowadays we have those machines, called computers (or automatic computers if you need the older name for reference), that can take software made for one architecture, no matter how unreal, and turn it into software made for another architecture.

[pphysch]

Could you share a Haskell compiler that produces output that can execute on a real non-von Neumann/Harvard architecture?

[thewakalix]

Why would anyone have built one of those, if non-von Neumann architectures are so rare? Compilers aren't much of a weekend project. I don't get your point.

[named-user]

Yes

[pphysch]

Please elaborate.

[mixedCase]

Compilers.

[pphysch]

Which (Haskell) compilers that target actually-existing hardware do not output procedural bytecode?

[mixedCase]

That is the point.