On Tue, 6 Jul 2010, Edward Kmett wrote:
While we're on the topic, does anyone else get funny looks when they
say monads?
Sadly, yes. ;)
There is no need anymore to bother people with the word monad:
http://www.haskell.org.monadtransformer.parallelnetz.de/haskellwiki/Category:Monad
It is ironic, but after reading your paper - Experience Report: Haskell in
the Real World, I doubt I'll use Haskell for a performance critical
systems. Laziness (and understanding it) is one factor, but there is also
GC, which is a real hassle, especially in embedded/mobile systems for a near
Haskell's FFI [1] is really nice, so you could still write your
performance-critical parts in C.
-deech
[1] http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/interfacing-with-c-the-ffi.html
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Zura_ x...@gol.ge wrote:
It is ironic, but after reading your paper - Experience
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.comwrote:
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Erik de Castro Lopo
mle...@mega-nerd.commle%2...@mega-nerd.com
wrote:
Pascal? Yeah, I used to program in that about 30 years ago.
I actually got that response from someone.
You
I must have the same impediment. We should start a support group, that, or
give in and write a compiler. To add insult to injury,
I think it should be called Turbo Haskell.
That's true... I never noticed, because in French the two words get
pronounced very differently.
While we're on the
I would expand your definition of monadic to:
able to syntactically transformed so as to be put in a sequence where an
operation can be altered by the results of the operations preceeding it.
IMO your definition matches more applicative.
2010/6/18 Alexander Solla a...@2piix.com
On Jun 17,
If you want to use cool languages, you may have to get a cool job. I
know: it's easy to say and harder to accomplish.
Most functional languages (e.g. Lisp, Haskell, ...) have a challenging
time in industry since they require some savvy with multiple levels of
higher abstractions and some
But as a
starting point, and especially to shake up preconceived notions,
it still helps to compress common prejudices this way.
Many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging
their prejudices. William James?
:)
--
Regards,
Casey
On Jun 17, 2010, at 9:44 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:
While we're on the topic, does anyone else get funny looks when they
say monads?
Yes, almost every time. They seem to catch on if I say monadic when
I mean able to syntactically transformed so as to be put in a
sequence.
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Marc Weber wrote:
Hi Aditya Siram,
- maybe shell scripting: running ghci takes longer than starting bash.
Compiling is not always an option because executables are bigger than
shell scripts or C executables
Is Hugs better in this respect?
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Henning Thielemann
lemm...@henning-thielemann.de wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Marc Weber wrote:
Hi Aditya Siram,
- maybe shell scripting: running ghci takes longer than starting bash.
Compiling is not always an option because executables are bigger than
On Jun 17, 2010, at 10:17 , David Virebayre wrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Henning Thielemann
lemm...@henning-thielemann.de wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Marc Weber wrote:
Hi Aditya Siram,
- maybe shell scripting: running ghci takes longer than starting
bash.
Compiling is not always
:)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:45:16 -0400
cas...@istar.ca wrote:
:)
Objection!
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/BASIC
A simplified version of the original BASIC embedded in Haskell.
--
Alexey Khudyakov alexey.sklad...@gmail.com
___
Haskell-Cafe
aditya siram wrote:
But I wanted to ask people are more experienced with Haskell - what
kinds of problems is it unsuited for?
Judging by the other thread, getting hired might be a valid answer here...
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
No argument there - I'm even afraid to stick it on my resume. At least
Clojure can be snuck into the JVM without people noticing - Haskell,
unfortunately, is not that shy.
-deech
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Andrew Coppin
andrewcop...@btinternet.com wrote:
aditya siram wrote:
But I wanted
aditya siram wrote:
No argument there - I'm even afraid to stick it on my resume. At least
Clojure can be snuck into the JVM without people noticing - Haskell,
unfortunately, is not that shy.
Oh, I don't know... Few companies will want you to *use* Haskell, but
lots of people seemed to be
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 01:38:23PM -0500, aditya siram wrote:
Judging by the other thread, getting hired might be a valid answer here...
No argument there - I'm even afraid to stick it on my resume. At least
Clojure can be snuck into the JVM without people noticing - Haskell,
unfortunately,
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Darrin Chandler
dwchand...@stilyagin.comwrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 01:38:23PM -0500, aditya siram wrote:
Judging by the other thread, getting hired might be a valid answer
here...
No argument there - I'm even afraid to stick it on my resume. At
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:01:53PM -0700, David Leimbach wrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Darrin Chandler
dwchand...@stilyagin.comwrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 01:38:23PM -0500, aditya siram wrote:
Judging by the other thread, getting hired might be a valid answer
here...
If you want to use cool languages, you may have to get a cool job. I
know: it's easy to say and harder to accomplish.
Most functional languages (e.g. Lisp, Haskell, ...) have a challenging
time in industry since they require some savvy with multiple levels of
higher abstractions and some
Andrew Coppin wrote:
aditya siram wrote:
No argument there - I'm even afraid to stick it on my resume. At least
Clojure can be snuck into the JVM without people noticing - Haskell,
unfortunately, is not that shy.
Oh, I don't know... Few companies will want you to *use* Haskell, but
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Erik de Castro Lopo
mle...@mega-nerd.commle%2...@mega-nerd.com
wrote:
Andrew Coppin wrote:
aditya siram wrote:
No argument there - I'm even afraid to stick it on my resume. At least
Clojure can be snuck into the JVM without people noticing - Haskell,
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Ivan Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.comwrote:
On 16 June 2010 15:45, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
* aditya siram aditya.si...@gmail.com [2010-06-15 19:47:37-0400]
Hi all,
Haskell is a great language and in a lot of ways it still hasn't found a
On 16 June 2010 16:00, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Ivan Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com
wrote:
Next you'll say there's no need for anyone to ask whether they prefer
vi or emacs... ;-)
Of course *real* programmers use ed. It is the
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
Next you'll say there's no need for anyone to ask whether they prefer
vi or emacs... ;-)
Of course *real* programmers use ed. It is the standard editor[1].
*Real* programmers use butterfiles [1].
[1]
David Virebayre dav.vire+hask...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com wrote:
Next you'll say there's no need for anyone to ask whether they prefer
vi or emacs... ;-)
Of course *real* programmers use ed. It is the standard editor[1].
*Real*
- an existing solution exists which does the job and you know you're not
going to patch the source ( eg OpenOffice or Linux kernel, or simple
build scripts. There is already make etc )
Don't you find yourself looking at the documentation each time you want to
write a loop in a Makefile ?
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
David Virebayre dav.vire+hask...@gmail.com writes:
*Real* programmers use butterfiles [1].
If your files are composed of butter, Id hate to see how you store them
in an efficient manner...
Oh well, at
I remember quite a few months ago, someone gave a presentation on
Haskell and he admitted that so far all he had used it for were shell
scripts. He said that his Haskell shell scripts ran faster than his
shell scripts written in ?
So all he had used so far, was just the imperative part of
Hi all,
Haskell is a great language and in a lot of ways it still hasn't found a
niche, but that's part of what is great about it.
But I wanted to ask people are more experienced with Haskell - what kinds of
problems is it unsuited for? Have you ever regretted using it for something?
Meaning if
Hi Aditya Siram,
- maybe shell scripting: running ghci takes longer than starting bash.
Compiling is not always an option because executables are bigger than
shell scripts or C executables
Haskell could be the wrong choice if
- an existing solution exists which does the job and you know
* aditya siram aditya.si...@gmail.com [2010-06-15 19:47:37-0400]
Hi all,
Haskell is a great language and in a lot of ways it still hasn't found a
niche, but that's part of what is great about it.
But I wanted to ask people are more experienced with Haskell - what kinds of
problems is it
On 16 June 2010 15:45, Roman Cheplyaka r...@ro-che.info wrote:
* aditya siram aditya.si...@gmail.com [2010-06-15 19:47:37-0400]
Hi all,
Haskell is a great language and in a lot of ways it still hasn't found a
niche, but that's part of what is great about it.
But I wanted to ask people are
34 matches
Mail list logo
