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

Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

foxhound.systems

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 297 posts

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#21

Post by KingOfCoders »

js8 wrote: post #14
jcelerier wrote: post #2

> Many programmers encounter statically typed languages like Java or C++ and find that the compiler feels like an annoyance. By contrast, Haskell’s static type system, in conjunction with compile-type time checking, acts as an invaluable pair-programming buddy that gives instantaneous feedback during development. the reason they "find that the compiler feels like an annoyance" is because their first exposure to Java…

Actually, the reason why I found static typing annoying in the past (and why I felt more productive in Python) were the types are really low level (missing basic things like tuples) and lack of type inference. You have to repeat the type information, a lot. And also you have to declare lot of intermediate data structures. In Python, this became easier and one could focus on the data transformations, thinking about th…

I've joined several companies, and getting into a Python code base was the most difficult one, because of the lack of typed method parameters. It was easier with Java and better still with Scala - same for Typescript vs. Javascript. I would be interested, is your Python experience green field or joining a large project? (just wanting to know, not implying anything on your part).

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#22

Post by ZephyrBlu »

avl999 wrote: post #17
jcelerier wrote: post #2

> Many programmers encounter statically typed languages like Java or C++ and find that the compiler feels like an annoyance. By contrast, Haskell’s static type system, in conjunction with compile-type time checking, acts as an invaluable pair-programming buddy that gives instantaneous feedback during development. the reason they "find that the compiler feels like an annoyance" is because their first exposure to Java…

> the reason they "find that the compiler feels like an annoyance" is because their first exposure to Java / C++ is in school where they have an assignment due for tonight and the compiler won't stop banging pages of errors about std::__1::basic_string > and what the fuck is that shit I just want to make games !!11!1! Well I can't imagine how much more annoyed they'd be when using an interpreted language which lets t…

In my experience, you quickly develop an intuition for where things are going wrong with interpreted languages.

Ex: "Oh, cannot access property x of undefined? Something must be going wrong in y object"

Python definitely feels a lot more helpful than JS though. Can't speak for other interpreted languages like Ruby.

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#23

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

No, sorry, it has very little to do with technology. There's at least a dozen languages you could have chosen, and that others have chosen for any given use case. within some bounds, it makes very little difference.[0]

The reason you've chosen Haskell and, by the way, also the TLD ".system", is that you've constructed your identity in such a way that "advanced language with a steep learning curve" is something that fits.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's a bit emotional, but those exist for a reason. If you consider that idea libellous, you can always cite PR motives for plausible deniability and point at this HN story as evidence.

[0]: Elm, by the way, strikes me as borderline with regards to the bounds of reasonableness, considering the state that community is in. As such, it's more evidence your left (right?) metaphorical hemisphere may have had a finger on the scale.

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#24

Post by fegu »

unicornmama wrote: post #3

Good luck scaling this to organization of 100+ engineers. You will soon learn the tradeoff between writing and reading code. And the stark realities of the dev hiring markets and the thing called a learning curve.

Using "boring" Haskell (less higher level magic) alleviates this to some extent - without being boring. The organzation should decide which features and code styles to use. I agree that the summer intern's multi-layer home-built monad transformer stack and custom operators can be a pain.

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#25

Post by mjburgess »

jcelerier wrote: post #18
js8 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the reason why I found static typing annoying in the past (and why I felt more productive in Python) were the types are really low level (missing basic things like tuples) and lack of type inference. You have to repeat the type information, a lot. And also you have to declare lot of intermediate data structures. In Python, this became easier and one could focus on the data transformations, thinking about th…

> the types are really low level (missing basic things like tuples) and lack of type inference how far ago was this in the past ? C++ had tuples and type inference for ten+ years officially now - gcc 4.4 had it in 2009

There's also the culture around the language to fold in.

A culture of writing code assuming inference and structural typing is quite different than it merely being available.

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#26

Post by corty »

jcelerier wrote: post #2

> Many programmers encounter statically typed languages like Java or C++ and find that the compiler feels like an annoyance. By contrast, Haskell’s static type system, in conjunction with compile-type time checking, acts as an invaluable pair-programming buddy that gives instantaneous feedback during development. the reason they "find that the compiler feels like an annoyance" is because their first exposure to Java…

Annoyance about C++ errors isn't only about the error occuring. With me, it is predominantly about the utter unusability of the error messages. C++ has postprocessors you can use to get your 20 page STL errors down to a few lines just by reversing the expansion the compiler did to show you mere mortal something that you might recognize as your code instead of template-cthulhu.

Haskell has such situations as well, but usually far less verbose. Getting something to typecheck because you wrote down something incompatible uninferable still sucks. But far less than C++.

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#27

Post by __0x01 »

unicornmama wrote: post #3

Good luck scaling this to organization of 100+ engineers. You will soon learn the tradeoff between writing and reading code. And the stark realities of the dev hiring markets and the thing called a learning curve.

I've found that code readability decreases (for me) with the generous use of and $.

Edit: removed ` characters.

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#28

Post by detaro »

st1x7 wrote: post #19
detaro wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The market works somewhat differently for small companies there. Yes, there are fewer people with relatively niche skills, on the other hand you have an easier time to attract the few you need. Not every company wants to become large.

> on the other hand you have an easier time to attract the few you need How is it easier to find a Haskell developer vs finding a Java/Python/PHP developer?

I hear far more complaints about how difficult it is to find good people from companies hiring for mainstream languages than from those using more niche stuff, I would assume mostly due to larger competition among employers for the former (and in parts better community access for small shops in niche languages and self-selection of who learns the niche languages)

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#29

Post by 414owen »

infinityplus1 wrote: post #8
unicornmama wrote: post #3

Good luck scaling this to organization of 100+ engineers. You will soon learn the tradeoff between writing and reading code. And the stark realities of the dev hiring markets and the thing called a learning curve.

Someone has to take the first step to solve the chicken and egg problem. If there are jobs requiring Haskell, it might get more users.

I write Haskell professionally, and I can confidently say that there are plenty of jobs. Some large tech companies (eg. Facebook, GitHub, Twitter), quite a few banks, a lot of consultancy companies, and plenty of random companies I'd never heard of.

It is quite difficult to get a first Haskell job though, because they mostly require production Haskell experience, so there's your chicken and egg problem.

Re: Haskell is our first choice for building production software systems

#30

Post by jcelerier »

avl999 wrote: post #17
jcelerier wrote: post #2

> Many programmers encounter statically typed languages like Java or C++ and find that the compiler feels like an annoyance. By contrast, Haskell’s static type system, in conjunction with compile-type time checking, acts as an invaluable pair-programming buddy that gives instantaneous feedback during development. the reason they "find that the compiler feels like an annoyance" is because their first exposure to Java…

> the reason they "find that the compiler feels like an annoyance" is because their first exposure to Java / C++ is in school where they have an assignment due for tonight and the compiler won't stop banging pages of errors about std::__1::basic_string > and what the fuck is that shit I just want to make games !!11!1! Well I can't imagine how much more annoyed they'd be when using an interpreted language which lets t…

having just spent an hour over vscode live share with a student who's learning javascript, I have a pretty good idea.

But I've worked with people who saw all compiler errors as things of the devil and wanted to defer as much as possible to runtime.

Post reply on HN