Decline and fall of scripting languages ?

[Donn Cave]

In article <7xwtmx7zp6.fsf at ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
 Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:

> "Donn Cave" <donn at drizzle.com> writes:
> > My vote would be Haskell first, then other functional languages.
> > Learning FP with Objective CAML is like learning to swim in a
> > wading pool -- you won't drown, but there's a good chance you
> > won't really learn to swim either.  Has an interesting, very
> > rigorous OOP model though.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by that about OCAML.  That its functional
> model is not pure enough?  I'd like to look at Haskell as well, but I
> have the impression that its implementation is not as serious as
> OCaml's, i.e. no native-code compiler.

On the contrary, there are a couple.  Ghc is probably the
leading implementation these days, and by any reasonable
measure, it is serious.

Objective CAML is indeed not a pure functional language.

   Donn Cave, donn at u.washington.edu