From d3a70f706d57530e6c3a12364af0fdcf51ec6e20 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Buetow Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 10:09:19 +0100 Subject: Publishing new version --- gemfeed/2010-04-09-standard-ml-and-haskell.html | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) (limited to 'gemfeed/2010-04-09-standard-ml-and-haskell.html') diff --git a/gemfeed/2010-04-09-standard-ml-and-haskell.html b/gemfeed/2010-04-09-standard-ml-and-haskell.html index 256c8faf..4602f248 100644 --- a/gemfeed/2010-04-09-standard-ml-and-haskell.html +++ b/gemfeed/2010-04-09-standard-ml-and-haskell.html @@ -50,10 +50,10 @@ h2, h3 {

Standard ML and Haskell

Written by Paul Buetow 2010-04-09

I am currently looking into the functional programming language Standard ML (aka SML). The purpose is to refresh my functional programming skills and to learn something new too. Since I already know a little Haskell, could I do not help myself and I implemented the same exercises in Haskell too.

As you will see, SML and Haskell are very similar (at least when it comes to the basics). However, the syntax of Haskell is a bit more "advanced". Haskell utilizes fewer keywords (e.g. no val, end, fun, fn ...). Haskell also allows to explicitly write down the function types. What I have been missing in SML so far is the so-called pattern guards. Although this is a very superficial comparison for now, so far I like Haskell more than SML. Nevertheless, I thought it would be fun to demonstrate a few simple functions of both languages to show off the similarities.

Haskell is also a "pure functional" programming language, whereas SML also makes explicit use of imperative concepts. I am by far not a specialist in either of these languages but here are a few functions implemented in both, SML and Haskell:

Defining a multi data type

I am currently looking into the functional programming language Standard ML (aka SML). The purpose is to refresh my functional programming skills and to learn something new too. Since I already knew a little Haskell, I could not help myself, and I also implemented the same exercises in Haskell.

As you will see, SML and Haskell are very similar (at least when it comes to the basics). However, the syntax of Haskell is a bit more "advanced". Haskell utilizes fewer keywords (e.g. no val, end, fun, fn ...). Haskell also allows to write down the function types explicitly. What I have been missing in SML so far is the so-called pattern guards. Although this is a very superficial comparison for now, so far, I like Haskell more than SML. Nevertheless, I thought it would be fun to demonstrate a few simple functions of both languages to show off the similarities.

Haskell is also a "pure functional" programming language, whereas SML also makes explicit use of imperative concepts. I am by far not a specialist in either of these languages, but here are a few functions implemented in both SML and Haskell:

Defining a multi-data type

Standard ML:

 datatype ’a multi
@@ -171,8 +171,8 @@ delete_one m w = do
             if x == w then (Empty, True) else (Elem x, False)
         delete_one’ x = (x, False)

Higher order functions

The first line is always the SML code, the second line always the Haskell variant:

Higher-order functions

The first line is always the SML code, the second line the Haskell variant:

 fun make_map_fn f1 = fn (x,y) => f1 x :: y
 make_map_fn f1 = \x y -> f1 x : y
-- 
cgit v1.2.3