Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I didn't write that sentence very well if that's how it was interpreted, sorry. I meant to say that the abstractions available to Haskell are more powerful.

I can't really think of any abstraction that's not available to it - even an Object System is possible in Haskell, it just wouldn't be as easy to use as Monads are.



> I can't really think of any abstraction that's not available to it [...]

Dependent typing doesn't work very well in Haskell (yet).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: