RE: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
Friends One of the absolutely best things about the Haskell community is that it is almost invariably respectful and usually friendly. People often remark on this when they join the community. Beginner questions are greeted with polite and helpful replies. Category theory and elementary type errors show up in successive messages. Etc. But thread is an exception. If you think someone is talking nonsense, I think the best policy is to ignore it or reply privately (not to the list); then the thread dies. I find derogatory discussion of a particular person quite discouraging. It is likely to be unjust, and it encourages more of the same. It's like littering your own house. Respect, guys, please. Simon | This troll was, apparently, invited by one of the Simons | onto the Haskell' list, then asked to move his spiels here. | | I am informed that the invitation I was referring to was actually | about his being invited *out*, not in, so his origin is still a | mystery and troll is likely appropriate. (I can't say he's | demonstrated much of a mathematical basis for his trollery; only a | propensity for pompous declarations, and deflection when challenged on | them. Put up or shut up, troll.) ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com wrote: Friends Amen ! ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com writes: Respect, guys, please. Yes. Much as I enjoy the mangling of Shakespeare (finally some use out of that Eng.Lit. class all those years ago), I worry that this will finally be the thread that launched a thousand replies and burned the bottomless archives of the Haskell Café. Thus I humbly submit the following proposal for the FAQ: Q: Somebody made an obviously counterfactual statement implying Haskell is inferior to some lesser language (one that only a moron would use anyway). Although I know we try to keep things civil around here, this person is obviously doing this on purpose to provoke us, and as a responsible citizen of this forum, I shall be forced to go against the normal comme-il-faut (and my better judgement) and publicly humiliate him or her, just like he or she wants me to. How should I best go about it? A: Words are like sunrays, and each word or ray burns hotter when focused and terse And if you have nothing at all nice nice to say make sure that you say it in verse If somebody argues in endless recursion you'll find that it irks you at times So either give helpful advice for conversion or produce your harassment in rhymes Trees are more lovely than poems, it's true and words can burn hotter than wood Do you really have nothing else better to do? Then at least try to make it /sound/ good. -k (Who has lots of better things to do, unfortunately) -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:36 AM, Evan Laforge qdun...@gmail.com wrote: I'd just like to point out or reiterate the odd rise in trolling and the recent announcements of haskell-2010... Just wait until haskell-2012 is announced with nonexistential aka eschatological types spelled notany a. World. It evaluates to a new form of bottom that blackholes the entire world... I hear prototypes are already being used at the LHC for this very purpose. Well-typed doomsday machines can't go wrong ;-) D -- Dougal Stanton dou...@dougalstanton.net // http://www.dougalstanton.net ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
Hi Simon and others, Personally I don't see anything wrong with this guy's line of questioning. He wants some proof that Haskell can live up to some of the claims made about it. There's a lot of selling of languages like Clojure, Scala, and Haskell going on that have real world examples showing how code compares from one language to the next (sometimes unfairly I'll add, in that the code that one person writes in one language, does not illustrate the best of that language). I will admit I missed out on the optimization thread that people refer to. I guess I could read the archives, but the tone of this thread makes me think it's not worthwhile. I think what it boils down to is Haskell use is a choice that every person gets to make for their spare time projects and if you're lucky enough to have such a choice at your job, why not check it out and see for yourself? If one disagrees with the claims of the salesmen, perhaps a trial period will convince one otherwise, it's not like it costs anything but time. There's not even a 90 day money back guarantee to worry about. As for trolls on the mailing list, I personally do not have time to read every message that comes through haskell-cafe because the level of activity is higher than my available bandwidth for reading emails. As such, I often press this lovely button the people who made my computer and operating system so thoughtfully designed called delete. Man does that thing ever work wonders... Then people can refrain from increasing the magnitude of the denominator in the signal to noise ratio that has a nice value at the moment here in this community. Sadly I think I just did the opposite, but since this is a cafe, and I had something to say, and I said it, I don't feel so badly about it, and won't comment on it again. Just my 2 cents, which might be all I have left these days :-) Dave On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:34 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.comwrote: Friends One of the absolutely best things about the Haskell community is that it is almost invariably respectful and usually friendly. People often remark on this when they join the community. Beginner questions are greeted with polite and helpful replies. Category theory and elementary type errors show up in successive messages. Etc. But thread is an exception. If you think someone is talking nonsense, I think the best policy is to ignore it or reply privately (not to the list); then the thread dies. I find derogatory discussion of a particular person quite discouraging. It is likely to be unjust, and it encourages more of the same. It's like littering your own house. Respect, guys, please. Simon | This troll was, apparently, invited by one of the Simons | onto the Haskell' list, then asked to move his spiels here. | | I am informed that the invitation I was referring to was actually | about his being invited *out*, not in, so his origin is still a | mystery and troll is likely appropriate. (I can't say he's | demonstrated much of a mathematical basis for his trollery; only a | propensity for pompous declarations, and deflection when challenged on | them. Put up or shut up, troll.) ___ 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: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism and debate. We should welcome it and I think that the initial response did. But the OP's follow up of: It will be better for all of you to figure it out for yourselves and gain more experience about what is out there. Haskell isn't the world. Haskell would be the cutting edge if it didn't have competition. tells me that the post was not intended to be constructive Best -Keith On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:58 AM, David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Simon and others, Personally I don't see anything wrong with this guy's line of questioning. He wants some proof that Haskell can live up to some of the claims made about it. There's a lot of selling of languages like Clojure, Scala, and Haskell going on that have real world examples showing how code compares from one language to the next (sometimes unfairly I'll add, in that the code that one person writes in one language, does not illustrate the best of that language). I will admit I missed out on the optimization thread that people refer to. I guess I could read the archives, but the tone of this thread makes me think it's not worthwhile. I think what it boils down to is Haskell use is a choice that every person gets to make for their spare time projects and if you're lucky enough to have such a choice at your job, why not check it out and see for yourself? If one disagrees with the claims of the salesmen, perhaps a trial period will convince one otherwise, it's not like it costs anything but time. There's not even a 90 day money back guarantee to worry about. As for trolls on the mailing list, I personally do not have time to read every message that comes through haskell-cafe because the level of activity is higher than my available bandwidth for reading emails. As such, I often press this lovely button the people who made my computer and operating system so thoughtfully designed called delete. Man does that thing ever work wonders... Then people can refrain from increasing the magnitude of the denominator in the signal to noise ratio that has a nice value at the moment here in this community. Sadly I think I just did the opposite, but since this is a cafe, and I had something to say, and I said it, I don't feel so badly about it, and won't comment on it again. Just my 2 cents, which might be all I have left these days :-) Dave On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:34 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com wrote: Friends One of the absolutely best things about the Haskell community is that it is almost invariably respectful and usually friendly. People often remark on this when they join the community. Beginner questions are greeted with polite and helpful replies. Category theory and elementary type errors show up in successive messages. Etc. But thread is an exception. If you think someone is talking nonsense, I think the best policy is to ignore it or reply privately (not to the list); then the thread dies. I find derogatory discussion of a particular person quite discouraging. It is likely to be unjust, and it encourages more of the same. It's like littering your own house. Respect, guys, please. Simon | This troll was, apparently, invited by one of the Simons | onto the Haskell' list, then asked to move his spiels here. | | I am informed that the invitation I was referring to was actually | about his being invited *out*, not in, so his origin is still a | mystery and troll is likely appropriate. (I can't say he's | demonstrated much of a mathematical basis for his trollery; only a | propensity for pompous declarations, and deflection when challenged on | them. Put up or shut up, troll.) ___ 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 -- keithsheppard.name ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
I thought we were supposed to be civil on this list? ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Keith Sheppard keiths...@gmail.com wrote: There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism and debate. We should welcome it and I think that the initial response did. But the OP's follow up of: It will be better for all of you to figure it out for yourselves and gain more experience about what is out there. Haskell isn't the world. Haskell would be the cutting edge if it didn't have competition. tells me that the post was not intended to be constructive In which case -- I believe David was arguing -- we ignore it and continue reading the constructive threads. Luke Best -Keith On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:58 AM, David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Simon and others, Personally I don't see anything wrong with this guy's line of questioning. He wants some proof that Haskell can live up to some of the claims made about it. There's a lot of selling of languages like Clojure, Scala, and Haskell going on that have real world examples showing how code compares from one language to the next (sometimes unfairly I'll add, in that the code that one person writes in one language, does not illustrate the best of that language). I will admit I missed out on the optimization thread that people refer to. I guess I could read the archives, but the tone of this thread makes me think it's not worthwhile. I think what it boils down to is Haskell use is a choice that every person gets to make for their spare time projects and if you're lucky enough to have such a choice at your job, why not check it out and see for yourself? If one disagrees with the claims of the salesmen, perhaps a trial period will convince one otherwise, it's not like it costs anything but time. There's not even a 90 day money back guarantee to worry about. As for trolls on the mailing list, I personally do not have time to read every message that comes through haskell-cafe because the level of activity is higher than my available bandwidth for reading emails. As such, I often press this lovely button the people who made my computer and operating system so thoughtfully designed called delete. Man does that thing ever work wonders... Then people can refrain from increasing the magnitude of the denominator in the signal to noise ratio that has a nice value at the moment here in this community. Sadly I think I just did the opposite, but since this is a cafe, and I had something to say, and I said it, I don't feel so badly about it, and won't comment on it again. Just my 2 cents, which might be all I have left these days :-) Dave On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:34 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com wrote: Friends One of the absolutely best things about the Haskell community is that it is almost invariably respectful and usually friendly. People often remark on this when they join the community. Beginner questions are greeted with polite and helpful replies. Category theory and elementary type errors show up in successive messages. Etc. But thread is an exception. If you think someone is talking nonsense, I think the best policy is to ignore it or reply privately (not to the list); then the thread dies. I find derogatory discussion of a particular person quite discouraging. It is likely to be unjust, and it encourages more of the same. It's like littering your own house. Respect, guys, please. Simon | This troll was, apparently, invited by one of the Simons | onto the Haskell' list, then asked to move his spiels here. | | I am informed that the invitation I was referring to was actually | about his being invited *out*, not in, so his origin is still a | mystery and troll is likely appropriate. (I can't say he's | demonstrated much of a mathematical basis for his trollery; only a | propensity for pompous declarations, and deflection when challenged on | them. Put up or shut up, troll.) ___ 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 -- keithsheppard.name ___ 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: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:09 PM, John D. Earle johndea...@cox.net wrote: See [Haskell-cafe] Optimization with Strings ? for background. Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. I am already well aware of the numbers. They do not impress me. I have written on this already. I have given Haskell the benefit of the doubt and said, What's wrong with being uncompromising? There is something wrong with it, if it has taken you off the path of truth. This is not uncompromising. This is something else. It is called fanaticism and this is the opinion that I have come to after due consideration. If you are going to argue your case, be constructive. Tell me how the type system is not flawed and how the Haskell language is rigorous. What proof do you have of this? Explain to me how Haskell has been merely uncompromising in its pursuit of perfection and did not manage to step over the threshold into fanaticism. Please remain on topic and on point. I honestly don't understand what your beef is. Could you explain what you mean with some specifics? In what way does Haskell lack polish? What makes you think it's not going in a direction where it will self correct? What's the path of truth and in what way is Haskell not on it? I would very much appreciate if you could try to explain what you mean using specific examples. I read the other thread and the post of yours didn't really seem to make much sense to me there either. -- Sebastian Sylvan ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
Sebastian, It helps if you think of John as having already won in this discussion, since he succeeded in getting a lengthy high-noise emotional reaction from us. :-) Cheers, Greg On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Sebastian Sylvan wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:09 PM, John D. Earle johndea...@cox.net wrote: See [Haskell-cafe] Optimization with Strings ? for background. Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. I am already well aware of the numbers. They do not impress me. I have written on this already. I have given Haskell the benefit of the doubt and said, What's wrong with being uncompromising? There is something wrong with it, if it has taken you off the path of truth. This is not uncompromising. This is something else. It is called fanaticism and this is the opinion that I have come to after due consideration. If you are going to argue your case, be constructive. Tell me how the type system is not flawed and how the Haskell language is rigorous. What proof do you have of this? Explain to me how Haskell has been merely uncompromising in its pursuit of perfection and did not manage to step over the threshold into fanaticism. Please remain on topic and on point. I honestly don't understand what your beef is. Could you explain what you mean with some specifics? In what way does Haskell lack polish? What makes you think it's not going in a direction where it will self correct? What's the path of truth and in what way is Haskell not on it? I would very much appreciate if you could try to explain what you mean using specific examples. I read the other thread and the post of yours didn't really seem to make much sense to me there either. -- Sebastian Sylvan ___ 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: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
2009/12/04 Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com: If you think someone is talking nonsense, I think the best policy is to ignore it or reply privately (not to the list); then the thread dies. I find derogatory discussion of a particular person quite discouraging. It is likely to be unjust, and it encourages more of the same. It's like littering your own house. +1 -- Jason Dusek ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
Well, since he thinks we're fanatics, getting a strong emotional reaction from us is something one certainly wouldn't desire. On 4 Dec 2009, at 21:14, Gregory Crosswhite wrote: Sebastian, It helps if you think of John as having already won in this discussion, since he succeeded in getting a lengthy high-noise emotional reaction from us. :-) Cheers, Greg On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Sebastian Sylvan wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:09 PM, John D. Earle johndea...@cox.net wrote: See [Haskell-cafe] Optimization with Strings ? for background. Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. I am already well aware of the numbers. They do not impress me. I have written on this already. I have given Haskell the benefit of the doubt and said, What's wrong with being uncompromising? There is something wrong with it, if it has taken you off the path of truth. This is not uncompromising. This is something else. It is called fanaticism and this is the opinion that I have come to after due consideration. If you are going to argue your case, be constructive. Tell me how the type system is not flawed and how the Haskell language is rigorous. What proof do you have of this? Explain to me how Haskell has been merely uncompromising in its pursuit of perfection and did not manage to step over the threshold into fanaticism. Please remain on topic and on point. I honestly don't understand what your beef is. Could you explain what you mean with some specifics? In what way does Haskell lack polish? What makes you think it's not going in a direction where it will self correct? What's the path of truth and in what way is Haskell not on it? I would very much appreciate if you could try to explain what you mean using specific examples. I read the other thread and the post of yours didn't really seem to make much sense to me there either. -- Sebastian Sylvan ___ 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 ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that it _is_. On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:09 PM, John D. Earle johndea...@cox.net wrote: See [Haskell-cafe] Optimization with Strings ? for background. Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. I am already well aware of the numbers. They do not impress me. I have written on this already. I have given Haskell the benefit of the doubt and said, What's wrong with being uncompromising? There is something wrong with it, if it has taken you off the path of truth. This is not uncompromising. This is something else. It is called fanaticism and this is the opinion that I have come to after due consideration. If you are going to argue your case, be constructive. Tell me how the type system is not flawed and how the Haskell language is rigorous. What proof do you have of this? Explain to me how Haskell has been merely uncompromising in its pursuit of perfection and did not manage to step over the threshold into fanaticism. Please remain on topic and on point. ___ 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: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
*flawed, that is On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:13 PM, John Van Enk vane...@gmail.com wrote: The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that it _is_. On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:09 PM, John D. Earle johndea...@cox.net wrote: See [Haskell-cafe] Optimization with Strings ? for background. Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. I am already well aware of the numbers. They do not impress me. I have written on this already. I have given Haskell the benefit of the doubt and said, What's wrong with being uncompromising? There is something wrong with it, if it has taken you off the path of truth. This is not uncompromising. This is something else. It is called fanaticism and this is the opinion that I have come to after due consideration. If you are going to argue your case, be constructive. Tell me how the type system is not flawed and how the Haskell language is rigorous. What proof do you have of this? Explain to me how Haskell has been merely uncompromising in its pursuit of perfection and did not manage to step over the threshold into fanaticism. Please remain on topic and on point. ___ 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: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
It will be better for all of you to figure it out for yourselves and gain more experience about what is out there. Haskell isn't the world. Haskell would be the cutting edge if it didn't have competition.___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
On 3 Dec 2009, at 20:09, John D. Earle wrote: See [Haskell-cafe] Optimization with Strings ? for background. Somehow all your posts to the Optimization... thread were classified as spam by my e-mail client. Seems like it's developing self-awareness. If you are going to argue your case, be constructive. Tell me how the type system is not flawed and how the Haskell language is rigorous. What proof do you have of this? Explain to me how Haskell has been merely uncompromising in its pursuit of perfection and did not manage to step over the threshold into fanaticism. Please remain on topic and on point. Happily. But it takes two to make a conversation. Why don't YOU start first? ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
OK, that was certainly constructive. Sorry, don't need a self- appointed messiah here. On 3 Dec 2009, at 20:31, John D. Earle wrote: It will be better for all of you to figure it out for yourselves and gain more experience about what is out there. Haskell isn't the world. Haskell would be the cutting edge if it didn't have competition. ___ 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: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
John, Miguel (and others), Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. [...] The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that it _is_. I admit it's tempting, but wouldn't you agree that, especially in this case, it's better not to feed the troll? Cheers, Stefan ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
Am Donnerstag 03 Dezember 2009 19:14:40 schrieb Stefan Holdermans: John, Miguel (and others), Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. [...] The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that it _is_. I admit it's tempting, but wouldn't you agree that, especially in this case, it's better not to feed the troll? To feed, or not to feed: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The quips and ramblings of outrageous trolling, Or to take arms against a sea of nonsense, And by opposing end them? Cheers, Stefan ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
Brilliant. Just brilliant. On 3 Dec 2009, at 22:54, Daniel Fischer wrote: Am Donnerstag 03 Dezember 2009 19:14:40 schrieb Stefan Holdermans: John, Miguel (and others), Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. [...] The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that it _is_. I admit it's tempting, but wouldn't you agree that, especially in this case, it's better not to feed the troll? To feed, or not to feed: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The quips and ramblings of outrageous trolling, Or to take arms against a sea of nonsense, And by opposing end them? Cheers, Stefan ___ 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: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
I think you meant to say: Now is the winter of our discontent with this troll made glorious summer by this son of Fischer. So long as we bastardize the bard, we best bastardize him fully! :) /Joe On Dec 3, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Miguel Mitrofanov wrote: Brilliant. Just brilliant. On 3 Dec 2009, at 22:54, Daniel Fischer wrote: Am Donnerstag 03 Dezember 2009 19:14:40 schrieb Stefan Holdermans: John, Miguel (and others), Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. [...] The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that it _is_. I admit it's tempting, but wouldn't you agree that, especially in this case, it's better not to feed the troll? To feed, or not to feed: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The quips and ramblings of outrageous trolling, Or to take arms against a sea of nonsense, And by opposing end them? Cheers, Stefan ___ 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 ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
Daniel Fischer daniel.is.fisc...@web.de writes: To feed, or not to feed: that is the question: Out, out, brief troll! This is certainly a thread that's full of sound and fury, but (or so I'm afraid) signifying nothing. :-) -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
To feed, or not to feed: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The quips and ramblings of outrageous trolling, Or to take arms against a sea of nonsense, And by opposing end them? Brilliant. Just brilliant. +1 Cheers, Stefan ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
So long as we bastardize the bard, we best bastardize him fully! :) If only we could claim: Though this be madness, yet there is method in 't. Cheers, Stefan ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
On Dec 3, 2009, at 13:14 , Stefan Holdermans wrote: John, Miguel (and others), Don Stewart wrote, the guarantees of purity the type system provides are extremely useful for verification purposes. My response to this is in theory. This is what caught my attention initially, but the language lacks polish and does not appear to be going in a direction where it shows signs where it will self-correct. It may even be beyond repair. I care about others and I don't want people to be misled. [...] The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that it _is_. I admit it's tempting, but wouldn't you agree that, especially in this case, it's better not to feed the troll? This troll was, apparently, invited by one of the Simons onto the Haskell' list, then asked to move his spiels here. That said, I have to say that, based on his output so far, I have trouble interpreting his path of truth as one of mathematical rigor; in the context of his On the Meaning of Haskell screeds, it sounds more like some kind of religious truth. I.e. the fanatic arrow's pointing the wrong way, as far as I can tell. -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon universityKF8NH PGP.sig 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] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
On Dec 3, 2009, at 21:22 , Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: Haskell screeds, it sounds more like some kind of religious truth. I.e. the fanatic arrow's pointing the wrong way, as far as I can tell. I also have trouble understanding how a programming language can be a fanatic. Or how you give that statement any mathematical rigor. -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon universityKF8NH PGP.sig 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] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
2009/12/03 Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH allb...@ece.cmu.edu: This troll was, apparently, invited by one of the Simons onto the Haskell' list, then asked to move his spiels here. I am informed that the invitation I was referring to was actually about his being invited *out*, not in, so his origin is still a mystery and troll is likely appropriate. (I can't say he's demonstrated much of a mathematical basis for his trollery; only a propensity for pompous declarations, and deflection when challenged on them. Put up or shut up, troll.) -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon universityKF8NH PGP.sig 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] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH allb...@ece.cmu.edu wrote: 2009/12/03 Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH allb...@ece.cmu.edu: This troll was, apparently, invited by one of the Simons onto the Haskell' list, then asked to move his spiels here. I am informed that the invitation I was referring to was actually about his being invited *out*, not in, so his origin is still a mystery and troll is likely appropriate. (I can't say he's demonstrated much of a mathematical basis for his trollery; only a propensity for pompous declarations, and deflection when challenged on them. Put up or shut up, troll.) -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allb...@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon universityKF8NH ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe I'd just like to point out or reiterate the odd rise in trolling and the recent announcements of haskell-2010... I'm not sure what you can do about that, but if people wish you ill, they'll come out of the woodwork when you're at your best. -- --Dan ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
I'd just like to point out or reiterate the odd rise in trolling and the recent announcements of haskell-2010... Just wait until haskell-2012 is announced with nonexistential aka eschatological types spelled notany a. World. It evaluates to a new form of bottom that blackholes the entire world... ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is Haskell a Fanatic?
The Mayan's Set 'em up, Haskellers knock them down... On Dec 4, 2009, at 1:36 AM, Evan Laforge wrote: I'd just like to point out or reiterate the odd rise in trolling and the recent announcements of haskell-2010... Just wait until haskell-2012 is announced with nonexistential aka eschatological types spelled notany a. World. It evaluates to a new form of bottom that blackholes the entire world... ___ 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
