[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Jon Harrop: >> OCaml's pattern matcher is very sophisticated and very fast. You'll >> probably shrink your code by several fold whilst also having it run a few >> orders of magnitude faster and having it statically checked, so it will >> be more reliable. > > You seem to forget some months of time to learn OCaml.
I think most people could pick up the core ideas in a day and start writing working programs. Just read: http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ocaml http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/chapter1.html > And my Python programs seem reliable enough despite being unstatically > checked :-) Damn. ;-) >> You might want to look at any language with pattern matching: OCaml, SML, >> Haskell, F#, Mathematica etc. > > Mathematica pattern matching is good, but Mathematica costs a lot of > money (and you need some time to learn it, it's not an easy system). Mathematica is expensive but learning to use pattern matching is much easier than learning how to write a pattern matcher and much less tedious than reimplementing it yourself all the time (which is exactly what the OP will end up doing). -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/index.html?usenet -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
