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

61–70 of 297 posts

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

#61

Post by kensai »

Has anyone had a look or knows of production systems made with a Haskell-like language named Curry? (https://curry-lang.org/)

Sounds a lot like Haskell with Prolog...

“ Curry is a declarative multi-paradigm programming language which combines in a seamless way features from functional programming (nested expressions, higher-order functions, strong typing, lazy evaluation) and logic programming (non-determinism, built-in search, free variables, partial data structures). Compared to the single programming paradigms, Curry provides additional features, like optimal evaluation for logic-oriented computations and flexible, non-deterministic pattern matching with user-defined functions.”

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

#62

Post by erdeszt »

dmitriid wrote: post #15

I dislike Haskell. But this article goes out of its way to make the worst possible case for Haskell imaginable. > 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 develo…

> So... Type signature `Int -> Int -> Bool` can be used for a function that does any of the following things: manipulates strings, decodes JSON, or queries a database

It can definitely NOT query a database(as that would be an effect which would be visible in the type).

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

#63

Post by willtim »

jrh206 wrote: post #10

Haskell is nice and all, but I'm not a huge fan of this take. I can't help but think that many of the arguments boil down to something like 'you can write types so that the compiler checks things for you' (not a quote), whilst the author disregarded the Java/C++ compiler as "an annoyance" (a quote). The rest of the article is mostly a comparison between Haskell and PHP/Python/JavaScript, and most laid out benefits bo…

> But, I've seen this a million times in Java

Perhaps when Java gets record types, sealed classes, pattern matching and other features. But right now, Domain Modelling in Java (and C++) is really painful compared to a higher-level language like Haskell.

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

#64

Post by tome »

kensai wrote: post #61

Has anyone had a look or knows of production systems made with a Haskell-like language named Curry? ( https://curry-lang.org/ ) Sounds a lot like Haskell with Prolog... “ Curry is a declarative multi-paradigm programming language which combines in a seamless way features from functional programming (nested expressions, higher-order functions, strong typing, lazy evaluation) and logic programming (non-determinism, bui…

Tangentially, did you actually manage to make an HTTPS connection to that site? I can only manage HTTP.

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

#65

Post by [deleted] »

gregorygoc wrote: post #49

I think most programmers nowadays face no interesting problems to solve. They crave for a mental challenge, but instead of looking for a job that requires solving hard engineering problems, they believe they can satisfy their mental needs with coding in “somewhat” hard language.

[deleted]

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

#66

Post by bachmeier »

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.

Thanks for sharing, but honestly, what does your comment add to a discussion of the post, which is about what works for them? You're making a rude comment that assumes they don't already know these things. Have you considered the possibility that the tiny slice of the world you've experienced is just that?

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

#67

Post by Tade0 »

gregorygoc wrote: post #49

I think most programmers nowadays face no interesting problems to solve. They crave for a mental challenge, but instead of looking for a job that requires solving hard engineering problems, they believe they can satisfy their mental needs with coding in “somewhat” hard language.

As a front-end developer whose job is is to write configurations(so not even actual code) for a form library I picked up Rust for this specific reason. Could've been any other language, but this one scratches my personal itch.

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

#68

Post by willtim »

pansa2 wrote: post #56
cjfd wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, though, that you mostly only get errors for code that is actually executed. So, your program is only fully type checked when all code paths are executed. In the case of python one can ameliorate this situation a bit by using mypy. At my job I see very often code being broken because, e.g., the signature of a function was changed but not in all places and so on. Now somebody will say that the IDE can sol…

> your program is only fully type checked when all code paths are executed. The solution to this is to make sure that, during testing, all code paths are executed. And that’s something you should be doing anyway, to find bugs that aren’t type errors.

That is impossible with almost all non-trivial software. Testing proves only the presence of errors not their absence.

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

#69

Post by Rompect »

corty wrote: post #26
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…

In contrast, Rust's compiler sometimes gives suggestions for changes which can often just be copied.

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

#70

Post by FlyingSnake »

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #23

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 f…

> 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.

I think you're projecting too much on them. They found Haskell performant and are promoting it, I don't see any problem with it. How is any different from all the Rust evangelism HN sees all the time?

Post reply on HN