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

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

barrucadu.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 363 posts

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

#281

Post by gbersac »

geodel wrote: post #252
pjmlp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those developers are being paid by Google and their actions within this context relate to the public image of their employer. If Google wouldn't agree with their actions, or did not pay to increase the team size, they would be developing the language outside Google walls.

You may disagree but Google relationship with Go looks lot more distant as compared to C#-MS, Java-Oracle, Swift-Apple. Here Dart-Google looks more appropriate. Those Dart people always keep telling us about Adword's usage of it. Google organizes Dart's conferences whereas for GopherCon doesn't even have Google as sponsor. Go looks far more independent from Google in branding, sponsorship and references from official…

That being said Go is one of the four recomended language in google : java, c++, python and go.

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

#282

Post by spraak »

SwellJoe wrote: post #225
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…

I've been thinking a lot lately about why Go, a quite minimalist language by modern standards, has been so incredibly successful in such a short time. It's about a decade old, and is already among the top 5 languages for people starting new OSS projects (at least in my area, which is systems management). Green field development is being done in Go at a rate unprecedented for such a new language, I think. Node/JS migh…

My journey and perspective is so similar, thank you for sharing your experience

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

#283

Post by cube2222 »

kuschku wrote: post #275
cube2222 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to take a look at your codebase if it's hosted on github (or something comparable).

Currently not, as I only used it in smaller projects in the past. In the future I’ll use it likely with QuasselDroid-NG, an app of mine that’s very early in development, and for which I developed it. The use case there is that we have a list of IRC messages, constantly updating and adding messages at any point of the list, and we want to update the UI and animate. The client can also cache, or preload, messages at an…

I'm not sure if I understand, are you actually using Go for your UI backing or using it as a backend for your application?

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

#284

Post by hamming »

rpeden wrote: post #51
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 agree to a certain extent. There are times when I've seen great beauty in something as mundane as pre-generics Java, when someone put together a well factored set of loosely couple objects to accomplish a task. Other times, though, being forced to work with obtuse tools feels like trying to construct a skyscraper out of sticks and dog crap. No matter how elegant a structure you manage to construct, doing so is a mi…

this is a shitty analogy

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

#285

Post by nv-vn »

gothrowaway wrote: post #277
59nadir wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I looked in your history and yup, you are partial to Haskell. It's convenient that you have no post history to go through, since you decided that the nonsense you're posting shouldn't be tied to your real account. Your bias is astounding, yet you go for the "your mind was already made up" card. I like Haskell but by no means am I tied to any single language and I'm not the one making posts about how all the users o…

If it were node.js, I highly doubt I'd have a person coming out of the woodwork with cleverly placed quotes as if it's a legal threat. Then blaming me for being biased as if you don't already have a conclusion derived. This is the behavior I experienced - to me, this feels like projection and trying to bully me into silencing what I truly witnessed. It really bothers me and makes me uncomfortable. I'm just stating my…

>You're proving my point. If it were node.js, I highly doubt I'd have a person coming out of the woodwork with cleverly placed quotes as if it's a legal threat.

The irony is that you came out to defend Go from any sort of criticism without any direct argument as to why Haskell is bad. Your post talks about the people who use it and criticizes them for criticizing other programmers, yet that reflects perfectly on what you are doing. And yes, I am also defending Haskell when I see your comment. I'm sure Node.js programmers would defend Node.js. Programmers care about their language choice as much as they care about their text editor/IDE choice, and it's something that we all love to argue about.

>At the end of the day, your reaction is predictable. I'm not reading too deeply into what you say because, like my prior experiences, I think you have your mind up, and in spite or proof given, you're going to be on the defense / offense.

So you haven't made up your mind already by criticizing Haskell before even evaluating it as a language? It's not making up your mind on it when you based all your judgements from personal anecdotes of Haskell and Scala programmers you've met before?

>xmonad literally has haskell mentioned as a feature

AwesomeWM lists Lua as a feature [1]. Maybe Haskell programmers care about that a bit more strongly, but both groups use their configuration language as a feature. Hyper lists JS/HTML/CSS as a feature as well [2]. Although I would argue the real argument between Haskell and other languages is safety -- just like Rust or Ada programmers would list those languages as a safety feature, Haskell programmers are inclined to do the same. It's pretty similar to saying "code has been tested extensively by our quality assurance team" or something "code has been formally verified," etc.

[1] https://awesomewm.org/ [2] https://hyper.is/

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

#286

Post by brianyu8 »

notjack wrote: post #271
SwellJoe wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, it's previous analogs are Java and C#? That doesn't feel quite right, either, in that Google makes no money from Go; Java and C# are both direct moneymakers for their respective stewards. I haven't really seen Google pushing Go that hard; it feels like a skunkworks project that just happened to catch everybody's eye (including the company it came out of), rather than a grand plan to conquer the world of programmi…

I wouldn't call it a grand plan, but it is one of Google's five officially supported server languages and as a result there's a lot of work being done to build tools and libraries for it. Code generation and relying on language-agnostic building and packaging systems (bazel) are both pretty common Google-isms, which show how the company's development culture influenced the priorities and direction of the language.

What are the other 4? Python, C++, Java, and what other language?

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

#287

Post by julian_1 »

noir_lord wrote: post #104
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 prefer less powerful languages (that have sufficient power to clearly express the domain). I've found that "powerful" languages allow me to do clever things(TM) and I hate clever things(TM) retroactively when I come back to them. This gets even worse when you have multiple people on the team doing clever things(TM).

I hate "clever things" as well, but it's worth being precise about what constitutes cleverness in different languages.

Dynamic languages - ruby, python, bash, objective C etc - allow all sorts of cleverness - such as monkey patching, attribute injection, dynamic lookup - because of their dynamic runtime. All the checks about whether the code makes sense is performed at runtime.

Languages with more mature/strong/static typesystems are initially restrictive - but the emphasis in cleverness is to be able to know upfront - and at compile time - if the code expressed is consistent in the way data and effects are represented and expressed.

Of course - there are other kinds of code complexity -in terms of ease of understanding, and maintainability - that will always involve tradeoffs considering the task at hand and nature of the programming environment (solo, community, commercial, academic etc).

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

#288

Post by sheepmullet »

SwellJoe wrote: post #225
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…

I've been thinking a lot lately about why Go, a quite minimalist language by modern standards, has been so incredibly successful in such a short time. It's about a decade old, and is already among the top 5 languages for people starting new OSS projects (at least in my area, which is systems management). Green field development is being done in Go at a rate unprecedented for such a new language, I think. Node/JS migh…

> has been so incredibly successful in such a short time.

1) Our industry is obsessed with new and shiny.

2) There are a lot of developers and companies who don't have the time to invest in a new paradigm or language.

3) By learning/using golang these developers and companies can look "hip" and forward thinking with minimal effort.

With a Java background and a 10 hour investment in golang you can write decent software.

With a 10 hour investment in Haskell you can't do anything.

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

#289

Post by gothrowaway »

nv-vn wrote: post #285
gothrowaway wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were node.js, I highly doubt I'd have a person coming out of the woodwork with cleverly placed quotes as if it's a legal threat. Then blaming me for being biased as if you don't already have a conclusion derived. This is the behavior I experienced - to me, this feels like projection and trying to bully me into silencing what I truly witnessed. It really bothers me and makes me uncomfortable. I'm just stating my…

>You're proving my point. If it were node.js, I highly doubt I'd have a person coming out of the woodwork with cleverly placed quotes as if it's a legal threat. The irony is that you came out to defend Go from any sort of criticism without any direct argument as to why Haskell is bad. Your post talks about the people who use it and criticizes them for criticizing other programmers, yet that reflects perfectly on what…

It's my experience and opinion.

Also, I looked through your history, you're a Haskell programmer. Due to the context of my thread, I'd appreciate it if you disclosed your relation so others know.

> AwesomeWM lists Lua as a feature

It's a scripting language on top of that's used for configuration.

> It's pretty similar to saying "code has been tested extensively by our quality assurance team" or something "code has been formally verified,"

The problem is Haskell developers aren't really getting enough shipped, especially relative to the advocacy I see of it. So how much does code correctness matter?

Look, let's say I want play FreeCiv. It being programmed in C vs Haskell vs Erlang doesn't mean much to me.

But imagine if FreeCiv lacked basic functionality or code documentation, and when people mentioned these things they'd get jumped by people who advocate it being programmed in an esoteric language who look down on those who program C as unsafe, inefficient, etc.

> So you haven't made up your mind already by criticizing Haskell before even evaluating it as a language? It's not making up your mind on it when you based all your judgements from personal anecdotes of Haskell and Scala programmers you've met before?

Hugo vs Pandoc

Awesome/i3 vs xmonad

You want to know why these solutions got more popular than the their Haskell predecessors? They had devops like documentation and tooling down. They picked languages that were easier to read so the community could participate. The discussion was about how to ship features by a version release, not how to force the language to get a purely internal technical working.

Users can't see the internals, so they don't care. They want something that's there for them on time and reliably. In all these years to this day, there's been more advocating Haskell philosophically on forums than there's been real discussion about getting stuff shipped. Try saying that for node/go/ruby/python.

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

#290

Post by btschaegg »

DenisM wrote: post #257
btschaegg wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I have thought about creating a template struct with a single member that blows up if you try to insert null. Something like this: 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; } } However you can still create a class FOO with a member NotNull xxx and xxx may be entirely uninitialized. It can be then passed fro…

I also thought about solutions like this for a while, but frankly, every option sounds like the attempt to fix a leaking dam using duct tape.

Things like this have to be implemented properly. The problem is that this ties into the core architecture of the platform, not only the language - references are basically the most important implicit primitive there is in the CLR (implicit because not even the IL handles them like the other datatypes).

I'm not very informed on the subject, but I suspect that without a proper way to declare locals and members non-nullable in the CLR, the matter would get rather complicated - there'd be no possibility to communicate the requirement through method signatures, for example. And since you could call pretty much any C# method from other languages, I'd expect various problems there.

Of course, one option would be to only handle the initialization and assignment checks in the C# compiler (I guess that would be much easier) and simply generate conditional ArgumentNullExceptions in every method, but I suspect that this would be a problem for performance reasons.

Post reply on HN