> > I'm finding Haskell to be quite a challenge, actually. One reason is > that the level of abstraction is higher than you are used to in MUMPS. > Another reason is that it is based on different abstractions (there is > no program counter, no "then", if you will) and so requires a different > way of thinking. > > Well, the syntax is a bit foreign to me as well. When I learned to program, I worked with a guy that argued (and molded my opinion) that code should be immediately readable by others if at all possible. So we were as verbose as much as possible. So this would be "good" code: "if IsPatientNew(Patient) then RegisterPatient(Patient)" and this would NOT be good code: if ptNew(P) then reg(P)
Of course there are many ways to solve a problem. But that Haskell code looks like greek to me. On the Haskell web site, there was a humor section, and the joke showed about 20 ways to code problem... many more complicated than they needed to be. But even the "easy" way to do was a bit different than I was used to looking at. Kevin ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today Register for a JBoss Training Course. Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit: http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idv28&alloc_id845&op=click _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
