Php has real enforced types
Typisch.
Why do programs written in Haskell not have side effects?
To have side effects someone would have to run the programs.
pandoc.
Yeah, there’s like two projects that use Haskell. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s the language that most people know and will never write anything productive in it.
I started programming in a time when the idea that the computer could keep track of your variable types for you automatically was a fever dream, so it’s wild for me to see some programmers now throwing shade at particular langages for “not implementing proper variable typing functionality”.
It feels like someone saying that low-fat milk producers are too cheap or lazy to put enough fat in their milk.
Fashion really does go in cycles.
Fashion really does go in cycles.
This here.
When I got into programming I figured it would be mostly linear technological progression. Every once in a while something new gets invented that’s better than the last iteration, so we discard the last option (except for legacy stuff) and everyone moves to the better thing.
But since then everything that was cool back then became uncool and cool again at least once.
I like the SQL/No-SQL cycle. SQL is powerful, but it’s also slow and clunky and if you do it badly it gets really slow. So we invented No-SQL DBs. They are fast, lightweight, but also barebones and limited. So we add functionality here and there, and before we know it we have another variant of SQL with a different syntax. So we head back to use real SQL. But then we realize it’s slow and clunky and if you do it badly it gets really slow. So we invent a new No-SQL DB and the cycle continues.
GOTO is all i’m saying.
I don’t even think it’s fashion. Some ideas sound good but are bad. Or, overlappingly, are convenient to use but actually turn into nightmarish spaghetti code. I don’t know how many people are still pushing MongoDB and BASE, for example.
Meanwhile SQL hasn’t changed, and C didn’t until someone figured out memory safety in Rust.
1950??? Statically typed programming languages are very old…
Sorry for not being clear; when I said “keep track automatically” I meant dynamic typing. Of course you’re right that “keeping track of your variables” could also be interpreted to refer to static typing.
Count us rust folks in. Typescript may doing it’s best, but it’s not as great
Listen I absolutely love rust but it’s not even close. Typescript’s type system is orders of magnitude more powerful, to the point where it is actually turing complete.
I code a ton in both Rust and Typescript for work… I think Rust has just as capable of a type system, but leveraging macros for functional defs vs object ones.
The same reaction whenever I look at haskell. A “pure” language with an escape hatch that has a fancy name. Once you open the escape hatch, you can write entirely impure code in Haskell and never see a pure function in your life. So much for “pure”.
You say your house is clean, yet nothing’s stopping me from dumping out this bucket of mud on your floor, curious!
Reading current discussion, it seems more like “You say that it’s impossible to dirty your house, yet nothing’s stopping anyone from dumping out this bucket of mud on your floor, curious!”
the only languages that don’t have an escape hatch of some sort are languages with no safety in the first place. the escape hatch is an important part of treating your developer like an adult
Same goes for rust and memory safety. What’s your point?
Haskellers when someone boasts about Typescript’s fake type system.
Haskellers when someone boasts about Typescript’s fake type system.
Are extensible records usable already?
Not that I would pick TS because of that, but the disdain is undeserved when it has some very useful features that Haskell has been trying to copy for years.
The features Haskell has been “trying to copy” from TypeScript are, without exception, features TypeScript copied from type theory research that predates TypeScript by decades – row polymorphism from Didier Rémy’s 1989 work, untagged unions from the intersection type literature of the 1980s, type-level computation from Martin-Löf’s 1975 intuitionistic type theory – and what you are observing is not Haskell enviously watching TypeScript and taking notes, but rather two languages drinking from the same well of ideas, one of which is doing so with a formal semantics and a proof of soundness, and the other of which is doing so while standing in a JavaScript runtime and hoping no one looks down.
Elm for ever!
