what makes it so unreasonably effective?

what makes it so unreasonably effective?

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >logo is trannies doing aerobics

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You’re mentally deranged
      Troons are living rent free inside your head, you probably shout at clouds if you think they look like trannies

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If we knew then its effectiveness wouldn't be unreasonable

        Now THIS is schizoposting

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Stop gooning now.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        who dat? she cute.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Keep gooning.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      achieve a quantum state of both gooning and not gooning at the same time

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      exist

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The logo is literally the bind operator in a monadic context.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >what makes it so unreasonably effective?
    We only apply it to problems for which is a good fit.
    On other problems we soon run into trouble and dump it for another language.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    here's the major reasons imo
    >types
    haskell has type inference, static typing and sum types. haskell goes far beyond this but these are enough to put it above most other langs
    >immutable data
    immutability helps a lot for writing parallel / concurrent code and haskell does immutability especially well.
    >monadic parser combinators
    these are basically a good framework for writing handrolled parsers (as opposed to using regex for everything like a Black person ape ape or busting out the parser generator for everything)
    haskell does them much better than most langs
    >the community
    haskell has mature people who are willing to import good ideas from elsewhere (like record dot syntax). it's not run by /k/opers who insist that improving the language would ruin its sovl or whatever
    >honorable mentions
    hoogle, ghci, the ffi

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      thanks chat/g/pt

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >monadic parser combinators
      People always mention this but I can do that in F# with full C# and .NET interop without having to use Haskell

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        wagie ocaml is worse than haskell in all other respects though

        >what makes it so unreasonably effective?
        We only apply it to problems for which is a good fit.
        On other problems we soon run into trouble and dump it for another language.

        in my experience, haskell is a good fit for every problem except those depending on a library in another language.
        i also find myself using rust for anything where i have to do bitmasks, though i could probably use haskell for those projects as well.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >wagie ocaml is worse than haskell in all other respects though
          such as
          I'm replying to that post and that guy didn't mention anything out of the ordinary

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >such as
            here's a small list
            >type system
            f# does better than most here but doesn't have typeclasses, which is a major disadvantage. f# also doesn't have GADTs somehow (which are not as important but still useful)
            this is the tip of the iceberg: haskell's type system is a lot more advanced than f#'s
            >immutable data
            f# isn't as good as enforcing immutability guarantees as haskell is iirc, which is part of why you can comfortably use STM with haskell but not really with the CLR.
            >hoogle
            f# doesn't have an equivalent as far as I am aware

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Don Syme dislikes typeclasses because he believes they add too much complexity and compile time overhead

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            He sounds like a fricking idiot.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            if you're so smart how come you don't have his salary?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            because his salary is paid to him, dumbass

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Don Syme dislikes typeclasses because he believes they add too much complexity and compile time overhead

            https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/243#issuecomment-916079347

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >but I can do that in F# with full C# and .NET interop without having to use Haskell
        "Hashmaps are easy to use in C, why would I need anything else?" energy

        Also you're an unemployed nocoder

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >.net programmer
          >unemployed
          impossible. he could write a few random lines of code and, without him knowing, a paycheck would be sent to his home address at the end of the month

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            1) I'm an employed .net dev with 6 years experience and the market isn't great at all. Stop lying.
            2) my point is he doesn't actually write code, he's just parroting blog posts he read so that he can feel cool.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            it was a joke.
            the market is shit all around, but I get bombarded with .net positions. at least 4 out of 5 I get are for C#, and I have multiple competencies on linkedin. but yes I exaggerated it a little
            t. also .net dev with 5y exp

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I get spammed with Java and Android positions even though I took them off my resume 5 years ago.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I figured it was about halfway writing my post but I'm getting too old to put effort into posts anymore

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The advantage of haskell here is that you can use do notation without overhead because the language wasn’t designed by apes

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Haskell can even be used as a proof assistant with liquid types.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    effective at?

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    pure

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Does Haskell have dependent types yet? Or do I need to wait for Idris?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *