Hello group, i've an interesting question.
What are the differences between CLISP and HASKELL?
IN What aspects one languaje is better than other?
I know LISP is older than Haskell but... �Is more powerfull than the last
one?
NOTE : THIS is a CONSTRUCTIVE question, and i like both of them,however
scientific comunity prefer CLISP to implement IA applications. �Is for any
particular aspect this preference?
THANKS TO ALL.
+ "Sergio" <········@teleline.es>:
| What are the differences between CLISP and HASKELL?
| IN What aspects one languaje is better than other?
Haskell is great for learning to wrap your brain around the concepts
of pure functional programming. You will find the lessons you learn
from that experience useful.
If you want to get real work done, however, use Common Lisp.
--
* Harald Hanche-Olsen <URL:http://www.math.ntnu.no/~hanche/>
- "There arises from a bad and unapt formation of words
a wonderful obstruction to the mind." - Francis Bacon
+ "Sergio" <········@teleline.es>:
| What are the differences between CLISP and HASKELL?
| IN What aspects one languaje is better than other?
Haskell and CL are both good, but very different choices. Others to
look into are OCAML, Erlang, SML/NJ, Mozart, and Mercury. Without
knowing in detail what your needs are, it's hard to tell.
Tom.
"Sergio" <········@teleline.es> writes:
> Hello group, i've an interesting question.
> What are the differences between CLISP and HASKELL?
> IN What aspects one languaje is better than other?
> I know LISP is older than Haskell but... �Is more powerfull than the last
> one?
Apples and oranges. Common Lisp is geared towards industrial
applications, while Haskell is more popular in academia
circles. Common Lisp integrates different programming paradigms
(iterative constructs, functional composition, OO programming),
Haskell makes stress on pure functional programming. More fair
comparision would be Haskell and Scheme (a puristic dialect of
lisp). Ask at comp.lang.scheme :)
> NOTE : THIS is a CONSTRUCTIVE question, and i like both of them,however
> scientific comunity prefer CLISP to implement IA applications. �Is for any
> particular aspect this preference?
>
IMHO, the choice of lisp for AI is more of tradition, and partially
because of huge existing code base and large number of publications
expressing ideas using lisp.
--
Eugene.
On Tue, 23 May 2000 14:36:37 GMT, "Sergio" <········@teleline.es>
wrote:
>Hello group, i've an interesting question.
>What are the differences between CLISP and HASKELL?
>IN What aspects one languaje is better than other?
>I know LISP is older than Haskell but... �Is more powerfull than the last
>one?
There's a paper called "Haskell vs Ada vs C++ vs Awk vs... An
experiment in software prototyping productivity" By Paul Hudak. It's
quite interesting...
Basically: learn with Haskell (or scheme) and work with Common Lisp.
CL is less "cute" that those languages, precisely because it makes
concessions to "real world" problems. This also makes CL a less
optimal learning platform, IMHO.
//-----------------------------------------------
// Fernando Rodriguez Romero
//
// frr at mindless dot com
//------------------------------------------------
Fernando <·······@must.die> writes:
> Basically: learn with Haskell (or scheme) and work with Common Lisp.
> CL is less "cute" that those languages, precisely because it makes
> concessions to "real world" problems. This also makes CL a less
> optimal learning platform, IMHO.
Do you have any examples of what you consider to make CL not-so-good
for learning?
My initial feeling regarding using CL for learning is that it should
be possible to introduce limited, "nice" subsets at first, and then
more as it is required.
--
Frode Vatvedt Fjeld