11–20 of 47 posts
My university teaches the intro CS course in Racket (lisp), and I know another that teaches in Haskell. If decades of priority exposure to young programmers is not enough to spur widespread adoption, then I'm not hopeful.
His Category Theory for Programmers book is an excellent introduction to the CT world if you come from a Computer Science background (well ... duh it says it right there in the title) and know very little math.
Highly recommended to give it a try, even if the topic doesn't seem to fit you. This is one of those books that will make you a better programmer regardless of what you do.
Bartosz is always doing great stuff. Check out is Category Theory lectures for people who know Haskell: https://www.youtube.com/user/DrBartosz
My university teaches the intro CS course in Racket (lisp), and I know another that teaches in Haskell. If decades of priority exposure to young programmers is not enough to spur widespread adoption, then I'm not hopeful.
I think most programmers aren't actually coming from university currently.
I re-did the interpreter from that class in C++ and it made insanely more sense to me than the scheme version. I could see where scheme was going and why it was a good fit but just hated it.
That same professor taught our C++ class (while learning it, they had someone quit) the next semester and they had to actually do a do-over he was so bad at C++. To his credit he knew as much half way through the semester (he had students getting ahead of him). He basically nop'd out of C++ like I did out of Scheme. It just didn't fit his brain.
My university teaches the intro CS course in Racket (lisp), and I know another that teaches in Haskell. If decades of priority exposure to young programmers is not enough to spur widespread adoption, then I'm not hopeful.
I think most programmers aren't actually coming from university currently.
There are just way more courses/universities that teach or taught Java/Python.
Businesses settle on the lowest common denominator it seems.
My university teaches the intro CS course in Racket (lisp), and I know another that teaches in Haskell. If decades of priority exposure to young programmers is not enough to spur widespread adoption, then I'm not hopeful.
I doubt I would've taken as well to Lisp if it was my first course, versus used in a couple graduate courses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most programmers aren't actually coming from university currently.
I did my interpreter class in Scheme in university. The main thing it taught me was I never wanted to use scheme (or lisp) and put me off of functional programming for many years. I re-did the interpreter from that class in C++ and it made insanely more sense to me than the scheme version. I could see where scheme was going and why it was a good fit but just hated it. That same professor taught our C++ class (while l…
I can still remember the homework for each programming language (this was 6 years ago):
- Something with genetic algorithms in Scheme
- 2048 implementation in Haskell
- Searching in an infinite space in Prolog
- Phutball in Clips
Pretty dope if you ask me. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most programmers aren't actually coming from university currently.
I did my interpreter class in Scheme in university. The main thing it taught me was I never wanted to use scheme (or lisp) and put me off of functional programming for many years. I re-did the interpreter from that class in C++ and it made insanely more sense to me than the scheme version. I could see where scheme was going and why it was a good fit but just hated it. That same professor taught our C++ class (while l…
An equivalent would be a class teaching c++ and writing and interpreter at the same time. And my gut says that would be more complex for unnecessary reasons than the class you took.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did my interpreter class in Scheme in university. The main thing it taught me was I never wanted to use scheme (or lisp) and put me off of functional programming for many years. I re-did the interpreter from that class in C++ and it made insanely more sense to me than the scheme version. I could see where scheme was going and why it was a good fit but just hated it. That same professor taught our C++ class (while l…
If you already knew C++, that's not a particularly useful comparison. Of course you were more comfortable reading and writing code in a language you already knew, than one you were learning. An equivalent would be a class teaching c++ and writing and interpreter at the same time. And my gut says that would be more complex for unnecessary reasons than the class you took.
And I did write that same compiler in c++ and sure it was more lines of code but I understood it better.
I've also worked on a scheme interpreter in C++ that someone wrote in a game engine and it wasn't all that complicated.