Wed Feb 10 16:28:50 CET 2010
Typed functional programming (Haskell vs. Scheme)
A matter of taste probably, but static type joy does come at a price.
A lot of patterns I take for granted in Scheme (i.e. through macros)
are not straightforward to express due to constraints of the type
Once example is pattern matching: often I would like to parameterize
type constructors. Probably I'm just not there yet.
It's too early to say, but atm I tend towards Scheme. However,
Haskell _is_ incredibly consise when you do find a way to stick to the