[Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Don Stewart wrote: So I guess that means that I don't count as a knowledgable Haskell programmer. :-( RWH is free and online, and covers many useful things. There's no excuse :-) I was about to say yeah, but RWH isn't that good - and then I noticed who I'm speaking to. ;-) So let me rephrase that: RWH isn't as good as I was hoping it would be. Still, since I haven't written anything better myself, I guess I don't get to criticise... In any case, surely the Typeclassopedia would be a far better place to comprehend Applicative? Writing libraries that bind to C is a great way to have to use a lot of hsc2hs (or c2hs), so clearly you need to contribute more libraries :-) So hsc2hs is related to writing C bindings? Well, that'll be why I've never heard of it then; I don't understand C. (Nor do I particularly want to... I chose Haskell.) Besides, why in the world do Haskell libraries have to involve C? I've written and released several libraries on Hackage, none of which are in any way related to C. Not every library is just a C binding, you know... ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
So hsc2hs is related to writing C bindings? Well, that'll be why I've never heard of it then; I don't understand C. (Nor do I particularly want to... I chose Haskell.) Besides, why in the world do Haskell libraries have to involve C? I've written and released several libraries on Hackage, none of which are in any way related to C. Not every library is just a C binding, you know... I completely agree with this. Even in implementing something as complex as a refactoring tool we never once needed to touch C. (nor Applicative, for that matter :) )... Chris. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Chris BROWN chr...@cs.st-andrews.ac.uk wrote: So hsc2hs is related to writing C bindings? Well, that'll be why I've never heard of it then; I don't understand C. (Nor do I particularly want to... I chose Haskell.) Besides, why in the world do Haskell libraries have to involve C? I've written and released several libraries on Hackage, none of which are in any way related to C. Not every library is just a C binding, you know... I completely agree with this. Even in implementing something as complex as a refactoring tool we never once needed to touch C. (nor Applicative, for that matter :) )... As a matter of fact, all of my Haskell codes didn't even touch monads. I always tried to write code as simple as possible and as understandable as possible (mainly for teaching purposes) and not as optimized as possible. -- Mihai ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 05:22 , Andrew Coppin wrote: Besides, why in the world do Haskell libraries have to involve C? I've written and released several libraries on Hackage, none of which are in any way related to C. Not every library is just a C binding, you know... Mainly because they're complex and already exist (and are often heavily optimized already); consider gtk2hs for the former and BLAS/LAPACK for the latter. You *really, really* don't want to have to reimplement any of those as pure Haskell, trust me on this :) - -- brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwvBu4ACgkQIn7hlCsL25UYmgCcCBXIk7MY51onQ8H/jPdSE9Hg BgsAmwZFRt8ryjI+jk5K4KrzCfhSRQZn =vdia -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 05:22 , Andrew Coppin wrote: Besides, why in the world do Haskell libraries have to involve C? I've written and released several libraries on Hackage, none of which are in any way related to C. Not every library is just a C binding, you know... Mainly because they're complex and already exist (and are often heavily optimized already); consider gtk2hs for the former and BLAS/LAPACK for the latter. You *really, really* don't want to have to reimplement any of those as pure Haskell, trust me on this :) Agreed. So let me rephrase: Why should _every_ Haskell library involve C? ;-) (I suppose I'm just bitter because any Haskell libraries involving C are almost guaranteed to not work on Windows...) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 05:57 , Andrew Coppin wrote: Agreed. So let me rephrase: Why should _every_ Haskell library involve C? ;-) Who says they do, or should? AFAIK it's only done for the reasons I mentioned (or, sometimes, for library compatibility; a native XCB library has been considered, for example, but it wouldn't share state with the XCB used by OpenGL, WxWindows, or gtk2hs (to name a few) so might have interoperability problems). When possible pure Haskell is preferred, but there's a lot of complex libraries out there that one should not try to rewrite. - -- brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwvCyUACgkQIn7hlCsL25UOUACeO66bd9Odm0r7cIofJk6dPN0C tWUAn2tUmZcJZnH1CQ241eTMDRfscssV =Lxt5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Hello Andrew, Saturday, July 3, 2010, 1:57:22 PM, you wrote: (I suppose I'm just bitter because any Haskell libraries involving C are almost guaranteed to not work on Windows...) haskell code is easily ported between OSes, unlike C one. when i ported my application from Win to Linux, i spend one day on haskell code and 3 days on C one, despite the fact that haskell code dealed with OS interaction and C used purely for computations C works on windows as well as it works on Unix, it just need some work to be ported between OSes, and since most developers just use one OS, C code has much more chances to remain OS-specific -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
On 3 Jul 2010, at 11:04, Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 05:57 , Andrew Coppin wrote: Agreed. So let me rephrase: Why should _every_ Haskell library involve C? ;-) Who says they do, or should? Dons rather implied it... The suggestion is that someone who hasn't used hsc2hs is an inexperienced Haskeller... I'd bet though that there are many *extremely* experienced haskellers who have never once in their life written a C binding. Bob___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 05:57 , Andrew Coppin wrote: Agreed. So let me rephrase: Why should _every_ Haskell library involve C? ;-) Who says they do, or should? Don, a few emails ago. Personally, I agree with you - certain libraries can and should use C, but by no means *all* Haskell libraries require C. (That would suggest that Haskell is kind of a pointless exercise...) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 06:12 , Thomas Davie wrote: On 3 Jul 2010, at 11:04, Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote: Who says they do, or should? Dons rather implied it... The suggestion is that someone who hasn't used hsc2hs is an inexperienced Haskeller... I'd bet though that there are many *extremely* experienced haskellers who have never once in their life written a C binding. I wouldn't be surprised if, for the purposes of Galois, ``experienced Haskeller'' *does* include hsc2hs. For others, it might not; similar concerns apply for any other language (think library packages). - -- brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwvDeUACgkQIn7hlCsL25UI8ACfRRde3G7UG1t9Czc/jH4Ibk8+ DEYAnjItSVSTGy9IpDMADszNnBjHPYHh =Yp4z -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Hi, Am Samstag, den 03.07.2010, 11:15 +0100 schrieb Andrew Coppin: (That would suggest that Haskell is kind of a pointless exercise...) Haskell provides pointless exercises, but even these are not pointless. (SCNR) Joachim -- Joachim nomeata Breitner mail: m...@joachim-breitner.de | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Key: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ Debian Developer: nome...@debian.org signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Bulat Ziganshin bulat.zigans...@gmail.com writes: haskell code is easily ported between OSes, unlike C one. when i ported my application from Win to Linux, i spend one day on haskell code and 3 days on C one, despite the fact that haskell code dealed with OS interaction and C used purely for computations Care to provide more details? This story intrigues me (even though I've never really used C that much, and would prefer to keep it that way). -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Mihai Maruseac mihai.marus...@gmail.com writes: As a matter of fact, all of my Haskell codes didn't even touch monads. I always tried to write code as simple as possible and as understandable as possible (mainly for teaching purposes) and not as optimized as possible. I take it you don't use IO then? -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
And conversely, someone who have made a C-to-Haskell binding may not be a Haskell guru. What about Arrows: do you think one should master them so that he could be regarded as experienced? It's kind of hard to put a border between casual Haskell and skilled Haskell, since it's a very wide language and your knowledge will depend on what you have already done. 2010/7/3 Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com On 3 Jul 2010, at 11:04, Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 05:57 , Andrew Coppin wrote: Agreed. So let me rephrase: Why should _every_ Haskell library involve C? ;-) Who says they do, or should? Dons rather implied it... The suggestion is that someone who hasn't used hsc2hs is an inexperienced Haskeller... I'd bet though that there are many *extremely* experienced haskellers who have never once in their life written a C binding. Bob___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Hello Ivan, Saturday, July 3, 2010, 3:24:34 PM, you wrote: haskell code is easily ported between OSes, unlike C one. when i ported my application from Win to Linux, i spend one day on haskell code and 3 days on C one, despite the fact that haskell code dealed with OS interaction and C used purely for computations Care to provide more details? This story intrigues me (even though I've never really used C that much, and would prefer to keep it that way). since 2004 i'm developing FreeArc archiver, something like winzip. in 2007 i've ported it to Linux. the only Haskell part that required was my own I/O library: i developed it in 2005 since ghc doesn't supported large files and unicode filenames at that time. my library used Win-specific calls and i, naturally, required to add some Unix way to compile it - i just used standard Haskell I/O calls generally speaking, as far as your program utilizes only existing Haskell libraries, it just work. problems starts only when existing Haskell libraries can't serve your needs and you start binding to some C or OS-specific code for the C part, i have found that some APIs i've used in mingw were in fact MSVC-compatibility ones, and was absent in Linux gcc i just looked at my darcs repository. Unix-specific patches were: added /dev/urandom as entropy source for Unix Unixifying: dir.size:=0 Added Unix support for GetPhysicalMemory, GetProcessorsCount Unix: config files in /etc; fixed compilation scripts Unix: look for SFX in /usr/lib Unix: UTF8 for filelist/screen/filenames/cmdline encoding Unix: getThreadCPUTime CUI: hidden password input now works on Unix too so, the main catch for C part were OS-specific calls like GetPhysicalMemory - i spent lot of time reading mans. for Haskell part, main changes were about default directories -- Best regards, Bulatmailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Yves Parès limestr...@gmail.com writes: And conversely, someone who have made a C-to-Haskell binding may not be a Haskell guru. What about Arrows: do you think one should master them so that he could be regarded as experienced? It's kind of hard to put a border between casual Haskell and skilled Haskell, since it's a very wide language and your knowledge will depend on what you have already done. Exactly; until I need to know something I typically don't bother really studying and learning it (e.g. iteratees: they sound cool, and I've read through the TMR paper on it, etc. but I still don't grok and understand them fully). As an example: until I took over graphviz, I didn't really understand combinator parsing. Now I feel I know how polyparse works fairly well, but I still have no idea how to use Parsec (either series), partially because of how complex it is compared to polyparse. -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
On Saturday 03 July 2010 12:12:56, Thomas Davie wrote: On 3 Jul 2010, at 11:04, Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 05:57 , Andrew Coppin wrote: Agreed. So let me rephrase: Why should _every_ Haskell library involve C? ;-) Who says they do, or should? Dons rather implied it... The suggestion is that someone who hasn't used hsc2hs is an inexperienced Haskeller... I'd bet though that there are many *extremely* experienced haskellers who have never once in their life written a C binding. Andrew Coppin: Who says they do, or should? Don, a few emails ago. I think you missed a small detail there. ivan.miljenovic: Hmm, interesting. Applicative and Traversable are two classes I've never used and don't really understand the purpose of. I have no idea what hsc2hs is. I keep hearing finger trees mentioned, but only in connection to papers that I can't access. So I guess that means that I don't count as a knowledgable Haskell programmer. :-( RWH is free and online, and covers many useful things. There's no excuse :-) Knowing about something /= knowing how to use it. I own and have read RWH, but I've never had to use hsc2hs, or Applicative, etc. Writing libraries that bind to C is a great way to have to use a lot of hsc2hs (or c2hs), so clearly you need to contribute more libraries :-) dons was replying to *Ivan Miljenovic* here (with a smiley to remove all doubt), he was teasing [is that the entirely correct word?] Ivan a bit. But in this case, the OP didn't even know *about* the something. That, however, is indeed an indicator (not infallible of course). After a few years of Haskell coding, it's very unlikely that you've never heard of those tools. Cheers, Daniel ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@web.de writes: Knowing about something /= knowing how to use it. I own and have read RWH, but I've never had to use hsc2hs, or Applicative, etc. Writing libraries that bind to C is a great way to have to use a lot of hsc2hs (or c2hs), so clearly you need to contribute more libraries :-) dons was replying to *Ivan Miljenovic* here (with a smiley to remove all doubt), he was teasing [is that the entirely correct word?] Ivan a bit. Teasing works (as the teased, I'll accept it anyway :p). As for what Don was teasing me about: lemme first finish writing all these base generic graph libraries, then I'll see about writing bindings to external C libraries for graphs, etc.! But in this case, the OP didn't even know *about* the something. That, however, is indeed an indicator (not infallible of course). After a few years of Haskell coding, it's very unlikely that you've never heard of those tools. Especially if you're active in the community, etc. I mean, it's still possible to not know about hsc2hs, but it gets bandied about every now and again. -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@web.de wrote: Andrew Coppin: Who says they do, or should? Don, a few emails ago. I think you missed a small detail there. ivan.miljenovic: Hmm, interesting. Applicative and Traversable are two classes I've never used and don't really understand the purpose of. I have no idea what hsc2hs is. I keep hearing finger trees mentioned, but only in connection to papers that I can't access. So I guess that means that I don't count as a knowledgable Haskell programmer. :-( RWH is free and online, and covers many useful things. There's no excuse :-) Knowing about something /= knowing how to use it. I own and have read RWH, but I've never had to use hsc2hs, or Applicative, etc. Writing libraries that bind to C is a great way to have to use a lot of hsc2hs (or c2hs), so clearly you need to contribute more libraries :-) dons was replying to *Ivan Miljenovic* here (with a smiley to remove all doubt), he was teasing [is that the entirely correct word?] Ivan a bit. Ohhh, so that's the quotation being discussed? I can not speak for dons, but I understood that he meant that more bindings should be contributed, really. Don't get wrong, I love Haskell-only code, but the reality is that reinventing the wheel isn't fun most of the time. For example, I have two bindings on Hackage [1,2]. We could write a 2D physics library in pure Haskell, and I think there was a project some time ago to write a 3D one, but that's a tough job. It is difficult to get right, and difficult to be fast enough to be useful. Chipmunk already exists, uses the MIT license and is heavily optimized. The optimization package would be even easier to rewrite in pure Haskell, but if you look at the API docs [3] you'll see that the C library handles a lot of corner cases and has many knobs to get the most out of the optimization proccess. In fact, the C library was written by the authors of the optimization procedure, so it probably has very few bugs. Repeating everything in Haskell would be a pain. There are many many other useful C libraries that we should have bindings to. For example, Hackage doesn't have any MPI bindings. Could we write an MPI client in Haskell? I guess so. Is it worth it? I doubt. Cheers! [1] http://hackage.haskell.org/package/Hipmunk [2] http://hackage.haskell.org/package/nonlinear-optimization [3] http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/nonlinear-optimization/0.3.2/doc/html/Numeric-Optimization-Algorithms-HagerZhang05.html -- Felipe. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Felipe Lessa felipe.le...@gmail.com writes: There are many many other useful C libraries that we should have bindings to. For example, Hackage doesn't have any MPI bindings. Could we write an MPI client in Haskell? I guess so. Is it worth it? We might get some in two weeks time shameless plugat AusHac/shameless plug!!! http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/AusHac2010#MPI_bindings -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote: Felipe Lessa felipe.le...@gmail.com writes: There are many many other useful C libraries that we should have bindings to. For example, Hackage doesn't have any MPI bindings. Could we write an MPI client in Haskell? I guess so. Is it worth it? We might get some in two weeks time shameless plugat AusHac/shameless plug!!! http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/AusHac2010#MPI_bindings That's nice! There are many interesting possibilities of high-level bindings that may be explored. I've mentioned MPI because I may need such bindings in a not-so-near future. I'll also note that having many bound libraries is also an advantage for newcomers. If they see that a library they use to solve problems in other languages already has a binding for Haskell, then they are much more likely to be successful and in a shorter time. I, for one, didn't have to learn anything new at all to use Gtk2Hs (thanks, guys!). Should we have only WxWidgets bindings then I would need to learn the Wx way before writing my first graphical program. (Alas, I've never programmed with Gtk+, the C bindings, I've learnt with Gtk# and then PyGtk.) Cheers, -- Felipe. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 08:01 , Bulat Ziganshin wrote: so, the main catch for C part were OS-specific calls like GetPhysicalMemory - i spent lot of time reading mans. for Haskell part, main changes were about default directories Even without libraries, if you're writing in C it's really easy to get tripped up by different sizes of variables (is long 4 bytes or 8? How about int? Does the compiler need an option or pragma for long long to work? Are you secretly depending on pointers being the same size as a particular type?) - -- brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwvYmgACgkQIn7hlCsL25V/LACfaCh/CEjrdv82Mf5k6ReSjNHH XbMAn1svrJ9Ico/zLr5UCxVVfASEHOFM =hYPQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/3/10 07:25 , Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote: Mihai Maruseac mihai.marus...@gmail.com writes: As a matter of fact, all of my Haskell codes didn't even touch monads. I always tried to write code as simple as possible and as understandable as possible (mainly for teaching purposes) and not as optimized as possible. I take it you don't use IO then? You can do quite a lot with interact. - -- brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwvaz8ACgkQIn7hlCsL25UvsgCfS3vvQ4zvauC1Qef42pVqW3s2 7J8AoNgCfP+cp+D/E5VJaVrXoEqQUIJG =zLVd -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
Back to initial topic, I have a sudden fear: do you have to master Template
Haskell so as to be regarded as a guru :-{ ?
Let it be no, please, let it be no...
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Are you a Haskell expert? [How easy is it to hire Haskell programmers]
I suppose that what qualifies as a good Haskell candidate depends on what you
are looking for in a software engineer in general. For my part, having hired
engineers into various groups over the last 20+ years, I've always preferred to
hire people who demonstrate a broad understanding of computing rather than a
deep knowledge of the particular domain at hand. So, for example, when hiring
into a C++ shop, I expect a medium level applicant to know templates, STL,
iostreams, boost, etc..., but I don't expect them to be able to rattle them off
off the top of their head. What I want is for them to be able to know what
tools are available, when they should consider using them, and where to go get
the details if they need them. An expert C++ programmer, who can rattle off
complicated template structures is not that useful to me if they don't have a
broader sense of what libraries are out there, or where to look, or even when
to use Python (or Haskell) instead!
On Jul 3, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Yves Parès wrote:
Back to initial topic, I have a sudden fear: do you have to master Template
Haskell so as to be regarded as a guru :-{ ?
Let it be no, please, let it be no...
Well, perhaps one doesn't really want that kind of guru! I've used Template
Haskell, I've written a Quasi-Quoter, but I've by no means mastered it. I've
got 77 packages installed in --user above and beyond Haskell Platform and while
I've not mastered all of them, what I know is what is there, and where to look
when needed. I've by no means mastered the various GHC extensions, but I've
written code with dependent types and know where to find the papers if I need a
deeper understanding. So, I think of myself as a general programming guru - one
who knows a pretty broad swath of computer science, and w.r.t. to many
programing languages one who knows enough about the language and libraries to
be able to find what I need to write excellent code. I suppose for Haskell I'd
call myself guru-in-training. Those are the kinds of gurus (or
gurus-in-training) that I've always looked to hire.
- Mark
Mark Lentczner
http://www.ozonehouse.com/mark/
IRC: mtnviewmark
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
