[clean-list] Clean in the Real World

[Fergus Henderson]

On 15-Dec-2003, Marco Kesseler <m.wittebrood@mailbox.kun.nl> wrote:
> if you just consider the "disaster" type of exception, hurting 
> referential transparency _seems_ like a minor issue compared to the 
> good old abort.

Why make this choice?  We don't need to sacrifice referential transparency
in order to prevent disasters.  Why not have referential transparency
_and_ catch exceptions?

Given that Clean is designed around the idea of pure functional programming,
preserving the properties of pure functional programming seems important.
If you don't care about those properties, then there are plenty of other
languages which you can use -- for example OCaml.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.