Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Clean Language

clean.cs.ru.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: The Clean Language

#31

Post by the_af »

cies wrote: post #8
tempodox wrote: post #3

Having never heard of this, I found the FAQ page an informative starting point. https://clean.cs.ru.nl/FAQ In simplistic terms, Clean seems to be a “better Haskell”. Edit: I just downloaded the bundle tar, looked at some sources and found out that vim has syntax coloring for Clean out of the box. Vim never ceases to amaze me. More Edit: Clean transpiles to C, which means that when you look at generated code, or just…

It's a pity this info is so hard to find. I had to click for a minute to find some example code, and thought: this is very much like Haskell. I wonder how it's better than Haskell, why not Idris/Coq/Adga, and why not contribute to any of the just mentioned projects. This info, combined with some code and a description of the target audience of the project would be very helpful indeed.

> I wonder how it's better than Haskell

I don't think anybody claims it's better than Haskell. It predates it, for one. The Clean programming language is its own thing, with its own philosophy, uniqueness types, etc.

Don't be mislead by the usual online flamebait trying to turn everything into "X is better than Y". This is usually claimed by people with little experience in either X or Y.

Re: The Clean Language

#32

Post by felixr »

IIRC I looked at Clean 10+ years ago and it was not BSD licensed; either closed source or some restrictive license. And that made me not invest any time into trying it out.

Do I remember this correctly? Does anyone know/remember?

Re: The Clean Language

#33

Post by Aachen »

And here I thought names couldn't be any more ambiguous than go and (to a slightly lesser extent because I use it less in normal conversation) rust. Here, even if you append lang(uage) I'm still not expecting a programming language when clicking the link.

Re: The Clean Language

#34

Post by felixr »

felixr wrote: post #32

IIRC I looked at Clean 10+ years ago and it was not BSD licensed; either closed source or some restrictive license. And that made me not invest any time into trying it out. Do I remember this correctly? Does anyone know/remember?

Answering my own question...

From looking at https://gitlab.science.ru.nl/clean-and-itasks/clean-ide/-/co...

  - Clean used to be dual licensed: commercial license + LGPL
  - 3 years ago LGPL was replaced by Simplified BSD
  - 7 months ago the commercial license was removed

Re: The Clean Language

#35

Post by ModernMech »

Aachen wrote: post #33

And here I thought names couldn't be any more ambiguous than go and (to a slightly lesser extent because I use it less in normal conversation) rust. Here, even if you append lang(uage) I'm still not expecting a programming language when clicking the link.

Rust isn’t as ambiguous as you would think, but it’s ambiguous in a specific and annoying way: there is a popular game called Rust, and it very often shows up in my search results when I’m coding. For as much as search engines supposedly tailor their results, you’d think they would have figured out by now I never ever want results from that game.

Re: The Clean Language

#36

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

Aachen wrote: post #33

And here I thought names couldn't be any more ambiguous than go and (to a slightly lesser extent because I use it less in normal conversation) rust. Here, even if you append lang(uage) I'm still not expecting a programming language when clicking the link.

Someone should make a Language language already.

(Let it be Microsoft or Google, for bonus points.)

Re: The Clean Language

#37

Post by carterschonwald »

felixr wrote: post #34
felixr wrote: post #32

IIRC I looked at Clean 10+ years ago and it was not BSD licensed; either closed source or some restrictive license. And that made me not invest any time into trying it out. Do I remember this correctly? Does anyone know/remember?

Answering my own question... From looking at https://gitlab.science.ru.nl/clean-and-itasks/clean-ide/-/co... - Clean used to be dual licensed: commercial license + LGPL - 3 years ago LGPL was replaced by Simplified BSD - 7 months ago the commercial license was removed

Thanks I was wondering it myself!

Re: The Clean Language

#38

Post by _vr9d »

Aachen wrote: post #33

And here I thought names couldn't be any more ambiguous than go and (to a slightly lesser extent because I use it less in normal conversation) rust. Here, even if you append lang(uage) I'm still not expecting a programming language when clicking the link.

Meanwhile the lisp comunity...

Re: The Clean Language

#39

Post by Aachen »

_vr9d wrote: post #38
Aachen wrote: post #33

And here I thought names couldn't be any more ambiguous than go and (to a slightly lesser extent because I use it less in normal conversation) rust. Here, even if you append lang(uage) I'm still not expecting a programming language when clicking the link.

Meanwhile the lisp comunity...

Woa, I never even realized lisp is something other than a programming language actually. Non-native speaker, but still, the walls of my bubble must be thick...

Re: The Clean Language

#40

Post by chriswarbo »

tempodox wrote: post #3

Having never heard of this, I found the FAQ page an informative starting point. https://clean.cs.ru.nl/FAQ In simplistic terms, Clean seems to be a “better Haskell”. Edit: I just downloaded the bundle tar, looked at some sources and found out that vim has syntax coloring for Clean out of the box. Vim never ceases to amaze me. More Edit: Clean transpiles to C, which means that when you look at generated code, or just…

> In simplistic terms, Clean seems to be a “better Haskell”.

Actually Haskell is a better (or at least, standardised) Clean.

There was a lot of interest in lazy functional programming in the 1980s, but everyone made their own mutually-incompatible systems (e.g. Clean, Miranda, and I heard that even Scheme was debating laziness at one point).

Eventually a committee came together to standardise on a single language (which could be extended in interesting ways). The result was Haskell.

Post reply on HN