Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dllthomas 4480 days ago
There are a number of toy operating systems written in Haskell. There are not very many "real operating systems" being written in any language, because it is a tremendous undertaking for uncertain value in a space that already has significant players with platform-effect lock in. I don't see why building a "real OS" in Haskell would be much harder than building a "real OS" in other languages, though.

I don't know anything about the state of GPU programming in Haskell, so I'm not going to speak to that.

Regarding embedded, GHC can target some quasi-embedded platforms these days, but it's also possible to write embedded programs in (pardon the overloading) an embedded DSL that can compile to C. Check out the Atom library.

I've heard about some people doing hardware synthesis involving (again) embedded DSLs in Haskell - I don't really know the state of it, but IIRC Conal Elliot gave a talk on some related stuff at one of the Bay Area Haskell meetups.

Jane Street is doing a lot of O'Caml stuff, and that's awesome, but there's definitely a lot of Haskell in finance these days as well (I've seen several job postings, and heard some chatter generally). I don't know which is better represented, or how it compares to other stuff - most big finance places don't talk about what they're doing inside.

Oh, and Haskellers actually type "Arrow" when they're working with a particular generalization of functions. When they're actually working with functions, they type ->.

1 comments

hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

"GHC can target some quasi-embedded platforms these days, but it's also possible to write embedded programs in (pardon the overloading) an embedded DSL that can compile to C."

Haskell can't do any useful work without relying on C. Instead of having pride in what C can do, you have invented the following adjectives "hybrid", "mathematical language", "insecure", "impure", "pure".

Either,

1) Stop with the adjectives and get Real.

2) Prove that Haskell can replace C, the "impurity".

The same holds true for mathematical heritage. I would ask mathematicians to use Mathematica, not Haskell.

(I don't consider OCaml to be a part of this debate because OCaml is hybrid and Real, like C++)

You asked some questions, I answered them in an attempt to be helpful. Any conclusions you draw about my personal beliefs are spurious and roughly as well founded as your conclusions generally. For what it's worth, I write a bunch of C and I like C very much. I also like Haskell and have to say you really don't know what you're talking about here. I'm not interested in dealing further with these kinds of ramblings, at this point.
> my personal beliefs

Your and the haskell community's puritan behavior.

> you really don't know what you're talking about here.

Can't Parsec English ? I define the word hypocrisy, from a dictionary no less.

This is nothing but trolling. I wasn't disputing your definition; but you weren't including it as merely an informative point on a random English word. By the pragmatics of English conversation, it was clearly meant as an accusation in this context. Your retreat to defense of the definition, as opposed to any notion of the applicability of the definition or of anything else you've said, is disingenuous. In any event, at this point I am done responding in this thread, whatever else is posted.