> Please find someone who has seen Chet Murthy's invited talk at > POPL 2007 and on how he seriously simplified and improved a > huge enterprise application with an FP approach and language. > He increased performance so much that he saved his customer > an order of magnitude of hardware, which is substantial when > you think of several warehouses full of machines. I found his presentation online - I am definitely intrigued to figure out more on this ;) <div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> YC, over the past semester I have written a small (6+ Kloc) > distributed game with a graphical display (but no real interface). I > wrote it in the FP style I advocated in my ECOOP keynote in 2004.</blockquote><div> Are you refering to this doc on your site? <a href="http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/Presentations/ecoop2004.pdf" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/Presentations/ecoop2004.pdf</a> It is cool!  The functional technique that you use with OO is quite interesting indeed.  Some of the pictures without words are a bit hard to grok - I found your keynote gzip but not sure what is the .apxl extension - would the keynote gzip have some of the text content?   </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> An intern from ENS and Sam TH have already ported the code to Typed > Scheme (in one day). We're hoping to report on that experience in a > paper. As others have pointed out 'types vs dynamically safe' and > 'oop vs fp' are distinct questions.</blockquote><div> Yup :)  </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> > My experience has been terrific. I spent one real workday so far and > the project is basically up and running. The interface-oriented style > of class-based programming has several advantages over plain modular > programming. I intend to report more details in an essay/paper one > day. (Sneak preview: inheritance plays almost no role.) > Eventually I intend to rewrite the code into the new unit-based > style. I conjecture that units and classes based code bases will be > nearly isomorphic. > Last but not least: I have used pure forms of FP and applicative OOP > here. Some other modules use set!-y style, and the conversion was > identical.</blockquote><div> Thanks for recounting your experience.  Very appreciated. I think the biggest brain twister for me with pure FP is statelessness.  I just found stream as the a way to model state changes explicitly in the system to remove side effects (and of course Haskell & its monads are still escaping me), and while I grok the concept it's still a bit hard to commit to an implementation. I will dig further in HtDP for exercises - thanks, yinso </div></div>