|
|
|
|
|
|
by codygman
4022 days ago
|
|
|
>> It may not be a race horse, but if you ported those improvements into something like C, you'll have a high-performance rocket. Code that could possibly automatically refactor itself into more efficient, more general components. > From what I can tell, this is actually not the case. Unless what you're talking about is Go. In which case, carry on. ;) So, don't have all the context... but it sounds like you are implying Haskell libraries can't be a "high-performance rocket" when paired with C whereas Go can? That sound right? Hope so, because it's the assumption my comment below responds to. What about libraries which take this approach such as bytestring]0], aeson[1], attoparsec[2], and binary[3]? 0: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/bytestring 1: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/aeson 2: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/attoparsec 3: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/binary |
|
|