Impressed

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 28-07-2012 09:58, Stuart wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 July 2012 at 07:45:20 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>> On 28-07-2012 09:36, Stuart wrote:
>>> On Friday, 27 July 2012 at 21:59:33 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>>>
>>>> - Scheme
>>>> - Haskell
>>>> - OCaml
>>>> - F#
>>>> - Erlang
>>>> - Clojure
>>>> - Some C and C++ compilers (gcc, Intel, MSVC in release mode)
>>>> - Most commercial Lisp compilers
>>>
>>> So, as I said, nothing you can write a real program in - except possibly
>>> for F#. The possibility of "some" C compilers supporting it doesn't mean
>>> you can rely on the feature being present.
>>
>> Are you serious........?
>
> Uh, yeah? Aside from C (which doesn't always support tail call
> optimisation), and F#, none of these languages would seem to have any
> purpose on a desktop computer. I don't know of any way, in this day and
> age, to write application software (e.g. Notepad) for a 32 or 64-bit
> Windows 7 machine, in goddamn Haskell. I may be mistaken.

Some of the most robust and reliable server systems are written in Erlang.

OCaml is basically F# but in native code. It isn't actually much 
different from using D in terms of capabilities.

Clojure runs on the JVM. It can do native invokes just like Java.

Scheme has FFI.

>
> As I understand it, languages like Scheme and Cojure exist solely to
> keep mathematicians happy. If you can't call API functions in it, what's
> the use of it?

-- 
Alex Rønne Petersen
alex at lycus.org
http://lycus.org