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

The Haskell / Snap ecosystem is as productive (or more) than Ruby/Rails.

blog.dbpatterson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–104 of 104 posts

Re: The Haskell / Snap ecosystem is as productive (or more) than Ruby/Rails.

#101

Post by zopa »

lincolnq wrote: post #83
getsat wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone explain what is happening in this example? I'm learning Haskell right now and this makes no sense.

Prelude> :t 11111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 :: Num a => a Prelude> :t (length []) (length []) :: Int Prelude> 11111111111111111111111111111 - (length []) 1729917383 Prelude> 1111111111111111111111111111 - 0 1111111111111111111111111111 Prelude> 1111111111111111111111111111 - fromIntegral (length []) 1111111111111111111111111111 Prelude> 11111111111111111111111111111 :: Int 1729917383 "Int" is the mach…

assuming that the length of a list will never be bigger than 232

Should be 2^32, of course. Though I think the real upper bound is (2^31)-1: there's a bit used for negative numbers, and there's zero.

Re: The Haskell / Snap ecosystem is as productive (or more) than Ruby/Rails.

#103

Post by mtrimpe »

masklinn wrote: post #34
mtrimpe wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree very much. As far as I'm concerned Java's biggest failure, orders of magnitude worse than all others, is to make java.lang.String a final class.

I don't know: 1. having nullable references by default strikes me as a bigger issue 2. I don't see any reason I'd want to subclass String, actually (though I could see wanting to create an alternate implementation e.g. ropes-based). So String being a final class makes perfect sense as far as I'm concerned (unless it were an interface or some sort of "proxy" class as is often done in Cocoa). On the other hand, I'd giv…

I must agree with the nullable one. Let's say the biggest failure that I haven't heard anyone else talk about.

As per your #2, that's what I was hinting at except that the implementation effort of final vs. non-final is negligible, thus making it harder to excuse as far as I'm concerned.

Re: The Haskell / Snap ecosystem is as productive (or more) than Ruby/Rails.

#104

Post by densh »

wylie wrote: post #2

This article was interesting, having only used frameworks that either do everything or just the minimum (think Rails vs Sinatra, or Django vs Tornado). I was beginning to wonder if there was a middle ground in web frameworks. The idea of a web library, not a framework, really appeals to me. Is there anything like Snap for Python or Ruby?

IMO Flask [1] is all about being a library but not a framework. By default it only gives you routes (based on werkzeug), templating (jinja2) and simple sessions. Everything else is available as a plugin. E.g. ORM [2], Forms [3] etc [4]. Documentation is awesome too.

[1] http://flask.pocoo.org/

[2] http://packages.python.org/Flask-SQLAlchemy/

[3] http://packages.python.org/Flask-WTF/

[4] http://pypi.python.org/pypi?%3Aaction=search&term=flask&...

Post reply on HN