I was under the impression he was speaking of parallel programming (software algorithms utilizing parallelism,) not sequential code running in parallel.
If you want to get into proper parallel numerical algorithms, most useful programs are C, C++, or Fortran, sometimes with CUDA or OpenCL kernels. I don't think I've seen any large-scale HPC applications in Haskell, as much as like that language.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to clarify my perspective, which I think the author shares with me and I feel is not being understood. We know what has worked in the past. To me the author is saying functional programming with language features helpful for parallel programming is a better path to take. If I say I believe electric cars are better suited for the future and you say millions of internal combustion cars exist and work just fine, you haven't told me anything I don't already know or addressed features of electric cars that you feel make me wrong. That a large electric car infrastructure doesn't exist yet also doesn't disprove anything. The internal combustion engine is going away and so is C++. That's my opinion.
"I was under the impression he was speaking of parallel programming (software algorithms utilizing parallelism,) not sequential code running in parallel"
The argument was about squandering the powerful multi-core hardware because of deficiencies in imperative languages. No notion of some platonic ideal of a parallel application was raised.
My point is that the "squandering" claim is clearly and obviously false as I argued above.
I agree that the use of the word 'squandering' is provocative and incorrect. reddit points out that he is evangelizing Haskell (FPComplete) and trolling C++ users on Twitter ("I used to be a C++ masochist") He doesn't make his financial bias clear in the article, which would have been helpful for those not familiar with him.
Ouch! Ad personam attacks are a sign of desperation. For the record, I used to work for FPComplete (I architected the School of Haskell) but I quit. It was an interesting experience, having seen a whole complex web site and an online Haskell IDE built in record time by a few Haskell programmers.
Sorry man! If you read the rest of my posts I was agreeing with you. I was just trying to address the reaction chetanahuja had to your article to say I wasn't blinded and had healthy skeptism, but I still agreed whole-heartedly with you. C++ is great for special circumstances but I'd hate to have to go back to it for general coding. Functional programming offers some very intriguing ideas, which I'm only starting to grasp. I don't really mind you being provocative because it provokes and discussion follows.
