world as value

[Marco Kesseler]

>On 21-Jun-1999, Marco Kesseler <mke@oce.nl> wrote:
>> Anyway, for imperative programming I see no reason to use something
>> 'similar to an imperative language that is not much worse'.
>
>If 80% of your program is better suited to a functional paradigm,
>it may well be easier to implement the remaining 20% which is best
>suited to an imperative paradigm in something "similar to an imperative
>language that is not much worse" than to pay the overheads that would
>result from cross-language development, if you were to try to implement
>the imperative 20% in a different language.

You are right, IF the overheads would be that high (are we talking about
runtime overheads here?). I am not convinced that this is indeed the case.
Actually, the Clean implementation itself relies a lot on code written in
another language (whose name I cannot tell, but it starts with the letter
'C').

Apart from that, a lot of code has already been written in imperative
languages, so the costs of implementing this are zero. And there
is so much of it, that it will take a long time before you reach the
20-80 percentages.

In addition, there exist some 'visual' (arghh...) programming environments
which do their best to let the imperative user interface code they generate
grow far beyond the 20% you are mentioning. I guess a Clean programmer
can't beat that.

And finally I am really spoiled and biased, and I want to use both
within the same project no matter what.

cheers!
Marco

---------------------------------------------

Marco Kesseler
Oce-Technologies B.V.
St. Urbanusweg 43, Venlo, The Netherlands
P.O. Box 101, 5900 MA Venlo, The Netherlands
telephone +31 77 359 5158
fax       +31 77 359 5450
e-mail    mke@oce.nl