On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Henning Thielemann writes: > > > ?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe > > programming. > > Is this a religious statement, quite popular in our Church of Functionalism, > or you mean something concrete by that, and if yes, then what?
I meant that these languages, which are the main products of Wolfram and MathWorks, respectively, are untyped or at least dynamically typed, and thus are certainly not the appropriate tools for reliable development and maintenance. However, I see that Jon Harrop claimed statical type safety only for OCaml and Haskell, and functional design and high productivity for Mathematica and MatLab et.al. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
