|
Dessert Rose posted:if c# didn't have first-class anonymous functions i'd probably hate its guts too so basically it goes like this 1. learn haskell 2. wish you were programming haskell 3. do terrible things trying to make c# be haskell this doesn't recommend haskell to me, someone who is trying to do the best job possible with the tools available to me
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:14 |
|
|
Internaut! posted:no and no but you're on my list, tbh scala seems to be winning the war of hearts and minds and I can understand why but it's a shame nonetheless clojure is riddled with the impracticality you just complained about in other languages. second rate java interop and little/no provisions for OO guaranteed clojure would be a non-starter outside niche use. clojure was never really part of the battle for the hearts and minds in the commercial world. it was groovy vs scala all along. i think scala is winning (does anyone actually prefer groovy to scala? i've never met a hardcore groovy user, just people who wanted to flirt with gradle)
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:17
|
|
|
groovy is for embedding afaict scala is disappointing, it has lots of cool stuff and even more terrible stuff
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
c++ is too big a language, and java is too slow. i know, i'll use scala
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
Internaut! posted:my point about dollars was we're not some shoestring startup stuck using open sores, we typically buy the best poo poo because it's cheaper than evaluating alternatives (lol IBM $profit/head) You need literally 0 category theory to become proficient in haskell. It's useful for design patterns and stuff, and anecdotally the people I know (not all mathematicians) who have 0 programming ability tend to love haskell's mathematical approach since it's very similar to how they've been taught to reason about things, rather than bowing to the tyranny of the machine. For example, code:It's telling that the total beginners who I've shown Haskell love it and the established programmers tend to have preconceptions that it's some super scary language with commutative diagrams coming out of its rear end at every turn. The plural of anecodote isn't data, but still. Clojure owns, and macros own for tedious processing tasks. macropy is the greatest thing to happen to python in forever and should be included by default.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
Internaut! posted:I have no doubt an abstract, first principles, category-theoretic approach to software development has its advantages i think the point of articles like those isn't 'you as generic developer X should know about all these interesting isomorphisms'; like i said, the author of that article doesn't think writing code like that is a good idea outside of blog posts. the point is more 'hey we're using a language that has a really nice theoretical underpinning to it, let's take that and see where it gets us'. near the end the author points out that memoization falls out of the concept of a 'representable' functor; since Product Identity Identity, the functor that takes a to (a, a), can be represented by (Bool ->), you can use pairs to memoize functions from booleans to things. this specific example isn't terribly useful obviously but if you run with it you might be able to construct more interesting memoizers. for example, you can represent integers as positions in infinite binary trees by using their bit expansion to go left/right, and infinite binary trees form a representable functor, so you can use them to memoize functions from integers, which is neat. of course you shouldn't be writing your own memoization code anyway, you should be using someone else's memoization library. but the author of that library might want to know this isomorphism so they can write better code with it. Opinion Haver fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Oct 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
Nomnom Cookie posted:groovy is for embedding afaict groovy doesn't appear to have any special faculties for embedding, no more so than java itself. and its marketing literature describes it as a "language alternative" for the jvm a few years ago it had "buzz," now it doesn't
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:25
|
|
|
Posting Principle posted:c++ is too big a language, and java is too slow. i know, i'll use scala it's true that scala is a big language. unlike C++, it's a big language designed by people who had done it before. their first attempt was so difficult to use they essentially abandoned it. scala is the language built with lessons learned from "funnel" (the experimental thing) and work on java generics tl;dr: scala is not as crazy as c++, even if it is quite large
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:27
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:For example, so what? once you say "= means assignment and not comparison" a couple times anyone who's ever going to get it will get it Malcolm XML posted:It's telling that the total beginners who I've shown Haskell love it and the established programmers tend to have preconceptions that it's some super scary language with commutative diagrams coming out of its rear end at every turn. The plural of anecodote isn't data, but still. yeah it's very telling that the people who love it are the ones who know nothing about programming
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:27
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:it's true that scala is a big language. unlike C++, it's a big language designed by people who had done it before. their first attempt was so difficult to use they essentially abandoned it. nobody uses scala so the developers can break compatibility on every point release. c++ doesnt have that luxury
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:yeah it's very telling that the people who love it are the ones who know nothing about programming tiny bug shaggar was right
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
i unironically know nothing about programming but 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:30
|
|
|
Posting Principle posted:nobody uses scala so the developers can break compatibility on every point release. c++ doesnt have that luxury they break binary compatibility because they have to, the constraints of the jvm force their hand. C++ does this also. they don't break source compatibility any more quickly than other language designers. old things are marked deprecated and removed a few releases later; new things are marked experimental and subject to change.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
gucci void main posted:tiny bug shaggar was right not really though. haskell owns
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
MeramJert posted:not really though. haskell owns it owns if u like academic languages with little real world value
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:22
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:yeah it's very telling that the people who love it are the ones who know nothing about programming e: you too sulk
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
Internaut! posted:no and no but you're on my list, tbh scala seems to be winning the war of hearts and minds and I can understand why but it's a shame nonetheless i really haven't spent as much time with lisp dialects as i'd like to have. there any papers/articles/posts/books you can recommend on the cool stuff that's possible when you finally get used to homoiconic languages? coffeetable fucked around with this message at 16:30 on Oct 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:(does anyone actually prefer groovy to scala? i've never met a hardcore groovy user, just people who wanted to flirt with gradle) gradle is pretty cool
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:clojure is riddled with the impracticality you just complained about in other languages. second rate java interop and little/no provisions for OO guaranteed clojure would be a non-starter outside niche use. i use groovy (and clojure fwiw) a lot and i like it more than scala simply because the idiomatic programming style is basically java with better syntax, it suffers from some pretty gnarly syntactic corner cases by trying to be ruby and python at the same time, but just like any language you have to know wehre the dogshit is and veer away i still don't get why you think clojure has second rate java interop? i've got a handful of significant (as in, in production servicing ecommerce) clojure projects and every time i pull in a java library it's easy peasy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
at some point i need to change this project to maven or gradle from the built in IDEA build system and both terrify me
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Posting Principle posted:at some point i need to change this project to maven or gradle from the built in IDEA build system and both terrify me use maven and dont look back, once you get over that initial soreass of moving your source structure to maven everything is gravy
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:43
|
|
|
trex eaterofcadrs posted:use maven and dont look back, once you get over that initial soreass of moving your source structure to maven everything is gravy this Notorious b.s.d. posted:they break binary compatibility because they have to, the constraints of the jvm force their hand. C++ does this also. they don't even break binary compatibility every point release anymore, it's every major release now (I guess you can call 2.10 -> 2.11 a point release, but 2.11.x is a feature release while 2.10.3 is bugfixes).
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
Internaut! posted:no and no but you're on my list, tbh scala seems to be winning the war of hearts and minds and I can understand why but it's a shame nonetheless there's no shame in seeing LISP lose again for the same good reasons
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 17:04
|
|
|
I'd definitely go for clojure over Scala for my own personal fun any day, and I really appreciate Rich Hickey's talks. I haven't done it yet because I have always been too lazy to set it up, and I need to go back to learning Forth also 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
trex eaterofcadrs posted:i use groovy (and clojure fwiw) a lot and i like it more than scala simply because the idiomatic programming style is basically java with better syntax, it suffers from some pretty gnarly syntactic corner cases by trying to be ruby and python at the same time, but just like any language you have to know wehre the dogshit is and veer away clojure is ok at calling java code. its more painful for java to call clojure--and before you say but but but you can use reify and gen-class and whatever--java calls scala code by calling it. u make a scala class and java can use it. that's why clojure's interop is second-rate
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:tbc what's the functional-est language you've worked with. not as in "played with for an afternoon" or "saw quoted on a forum once", but actually worked with for >month "you can't criticize my lovely language until you've used it. for a MONTH." lol get the gently caress out of here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
Nomnom Cookie posted:clojure is ok at calling java code. its more painful for java to call clojure--and before you say but but but you can use reify and gen-class and whatever--java calls scala code by calling it. u make a scala class and java can use it. that's why clojure's interop is second-rate ah well that said :gen-class is easy enough to use, so i guess second-rate is fine by me
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
trex eaterofcadrs posted:i use groovy (and clojure fwiw) a lot and i like it more than scala simply because the idiomatic programming style is basically java with better syntax, it suffers from some pretty gnarly syntactic corner cases by trying to be ruby and python at the same time, but just like any language you have to know wehre the dogshit is and veer away goddamn debugging groovy was terrible. you'd add some debug output, set a breakpoint and start things up. you hit the breakpoint, inspect the call stack, look at the output. so far so good. you'd change the output abit and think 'it's pretty nifty that I don't have to restart anything, I'm so agile and dynamic and productive right now' then you'd hit the breakpoint again and the call stack would be completely different, totally alien, nothing in common from just a moment ago. 'well that's not good, maybe a restart will fix that.' and what do you know, it does, every time it happens
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 19:21
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:tbc what's the functional-est language you've worked with. not as in "played with for an afternoon" or "saw quoted on a forum once", but actually worked with for >month tbc is a php troll but a good lad that means well and you shouldn't expect good answers from him sulk is amazingly stupid and you shouldn't expect good answers from him, but add in a heaping dose of pity
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:I'd definitely go for clojure over Scala for my own personal fun any day, and I really appreciate Rich Hickey's talks. Chuck moore has literal forth machines for sale, which are basically 144 tiny cores on a chip, but my soldering skills suck :/ green arrays dev board is like $400 for a presoldered one
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 20:36
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:"you can't criticize my lovely language until you've used it. for a MONTH." lol get the gently caress out of here. i actually agree with him when i poo poo all over php and call a piss bucket for idiots, it's because i've spent months of my life suffering through the maintenance of php codebases
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:I'd definitely go for clojure over Scala for my own personal fun any day, and I really appreciate Rich Hickey's talks. rich hickey is a great speaker and clojure is carefully designed. i'm not gonna poo poo on clojure it's pretty good at doing what it does. it's just not the language i want for most things most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
i just finished working on a high-quality php codebase and its only about half as bad as working on a bad one
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:rich hickey is a great speaker and clojure is carefully designed. i'm not gonna poo poo on clojure it's pretty good at doing what it does. it's just not the language i want for most things most of the time. a reasonable opinion in yospos 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
Nomnom Cookie posted:so basically it goes like this i wasnt suggesting that you learn haskell in particular i was saying that i learned programming concepts in haskell that make shitloads of sense but c# does not have one of them first class [anonymous] functions are a feature that are in literally every language i will ever care about writing code in (c#, objc, c++, all the good p-langs) type constructors are basically only in haskell, and that sucks, because there's a lot of neat stuff you can do with them. however, like any language feature, they're really just syntactic sugar and it's possible to implement something that achieves the same effect in other languages (assuming they make sense. it doesn't make sense to have type constructors outside a strongly typed language.) but if you didn't even understand the concept, and had never written code in a language that made that sort of thing easy, you'd never think to design a system that way learning something like c#, a language which supports nearly everything modern you can think of, means that you will learn one way of doing things and never step outside of it learning something like haskell, or lisp, languages which are very narrow in what they allow you to do and that use drastically different methodologies from the "norm" (ie procedural OO), forces you to learn a different way to see the code you want to write. spending a month or so "native" in this environment will change the way you think about your code, improving your mental models, etc. but hey, if all you care about is making dollars and you're not interested in actually learning how to think about your code outside of the restrictive terms of a single language, go nuts
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
Nomnom Cookie posted:so basically it goes like this jokes on u, c# picks and chooses haskell features and changes them to fit in the CLR Monads, do notation => LINQ FRP => .NET Reactive Extensions
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:"you can't criticize my lovely language until you've used it. for a MONTH." lol get the gently caress out of here. soooo you haven't worked in any functional languages then
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:soooo you haven't worked in any functional languages then what are you talking about php has had closures for like 4 years now
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:jokes on u, c# picks and chooses haskell features and changes them to fit in the CLR it's called throwing out the bathwater and stealing the baby
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:14 |
|
|
php is loving poo poo though
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2013 22:42
|
|