Three Months of Go, from a Haskeller’s perspective (2016)

Post by pekk » Sun, Mar 19, 2017, 7:22 PM UTC

platz wrote: post #207

crimsonalucard wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haskell is actually less expressive. It is a functional abstraction on top of what is essentially a procedural machine and with all abstractions placed on top of lower layers you can only lose functionality as you go up rather than gain. You could say assembly language is the most expressive language out there. The great thing about Haskell and other functional programming languages is that the functional style force…

> In haskell the application has to be an elegant diamond or the thing won't even compile! Nonsense - You only have to make things as hard/elegant as you want them to be (and fore sure, some people do play that game for better/worse). But, Haskell will happily allow you throw everything in to IO; you can side-step creating a perfect model and just hack together a list of imperative IO statements. (unless you're refer…

Post by seagreen » Sun, Mar 19, 2017, 7:29 PM UTC

TheCondor wrote: post #134

jwdunne wrote: post #8

It is, I think, going to be very difficult to enjoy writing code in a less powerful language when you are exposed to languages that hold awesome power. In fact, this has been the basis for much writing on Lisp too. Paul Graham has written entire essays along the same lines. If you work in a job that forces the use of a less powerful language than what you've been exposed to, you can, I think, go through a sort of dep…

I don't know how to ask this without it sounding offensive, and I don't intend it that way. But do these "hardcore" haskellers enjoy writing programs at all? Like are there any well known open source apps that people actually use written in Haskell? There are tons of hobbiests and it has a following but what are the examples of its greatness? I ask as an old SML guy, I like the math theory, I like the promise of bett…

Post by Ar-Curunir » Sun, Mar 19, 2017, 7:37 PM UTC

zumu wrote: post #248

TheCondor wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how to ask this without it sounding offensive, and I don't intend it that way. But do these "hardcore" haskellers enjoy writing programs at all? Like are there any well known open source apps that people actually use written in Haskell? There are tons of hobbiests and it has a following but what are the examples of its greatness? I ask as an old SML guy, I like the math theory, I like the promise of bett…

Not OSS, but I know Galois use a lot of haskell in their work for largely government agencies (NASA, DoD, etc.) Perhaps the type of problems Haskell is apt to solve (those requiring strict correctness, etc.) are not typically open source software projects.

Post by DenisM » Sun, Mar 19, 2017, 7:45 PM UTC

btschaegg wrote: post #153

46Bit wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Dynamic languages make testing easier," paints a very broad brush. They have some very nice benefits, but also a lot of edgecases. * An argument might be an int when you expected a float. This can be addressed by casting things with `float()` in every entrypoint, but it's more defensive to require a float and error out otherwise. Either way, problems only appear at runtime. * An object might be null and this only ge…

> An object might be null and this only gets picked up at runtime - using Rust it's been very nice to have to explicitly say when things can be null. This point actually frustrates me greatly about C# 7. At some point, there was talk about non-nullable references being introduced into the language, which has been put on hold for at least another version. Personally, I think that feature should have been in the langua…

  public struct NotNull
  {
    private readonly T val;
    public T Value { 
      get { return val; } 
    }
    public NotNull(T v)
    {
        if (v==null) 
          throw new Exception(); 
        val = v;
    }
  }

Post by cormacrelf » Sun, Mar 19, 2017, 7:53 PM UTC

AsyncAwait wrote: post #150

cube2222 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the thing is, with compile times of 2 seconds I can run my unit tests as fast as possible. At the same time, I'd just use a mock database for most of the tests. It's great to be able to compile applications like kubernetes in 2 minutes.

If compile time is an issue, the new 'cargo check' tool may take some of the pain away.[1] 1 - https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/03/16/Rust-1.16.html