i interpret it as this:

all [ usage x > usage y || fun_to_talk_about x > fun_to_talk_about y
    | let lang=[minBound .. maxBound] -- C++,Haskell,Java,etc.
    , x<-lang
    , y<-lang
    , irc_channel_users x > irc_channel_users y 
    ]


- marc


Am Dienstag, 21. August 2007 schrieb Albert Y. C. Lai:
> Andrew Coppin wrote:
> > ...does this mean Haskell is officially harder to understand than Lisp, 
> > Java, Perl and O'Caml? :-}
> > 
> > (OTOH, does this mean Haskell is easier to understand than PHP or C++?)
> 
> Or, Haskell is the easiest to understand of them all.
> 
> Reason: Extremely large channel means so hard to understand that many 
> people want help. Extremely small channel means so hard to understand 
> that few people show interest. The middle-sized channel sits at the 
> sweet spot.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
> 


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Reply via email to