zoomerang

6 ms·

1.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Haskell functions return side-effects using the IO type, with the boilerplate plumbing being hidden with monads and do-notation. "main" in Haskell by default has a return type of "IO ()", and any "IO" values re
2.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Typescript is really starting to look quite compelling. If we could have null-safety and ADTs I'd be using it in a heartbeat.
3.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Really, the only reason Javascripts future looks very bright is because it has a monopoly - it's the only language that runs in the browser. Javascript is a great language for what it is, and ES6 fixes a lot of the warts - but it'
4.
by zoomerang 12y ago
I can remember this switch back in the day, but for some reason my memory has failed me. I could have sworn the original was in Haskell, not Lisp. Selective memory I guess.
5.
by zoomerang 12y ago
As somebody with more experience with Haskell and Scala than Clojure - how to Transducers differ from Functors in Haskell? On the surface they seem very similar.
6.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Out of curiosity, what's difficult about that mutable array implementation? I'm a relative Haskell novice, but was able to write some mutable array code with only a cursory read through the documentation. Granted it's extreme
7.
by zoomerang 12y ago
First up - I'll preface my reply below with a big disclaimer that I'm a relative notice with Haskell, so these are purely my opinions at this point in my learning curve. > What's "it" - Haskell, or referential tr
8.
by zoomerang 12y ago
No specific reason really. I didn't think about it at the time, that's just how I typed it. Probably because C is a single letter, and thus potentially needs some differentiation from the surrounding sentence, whereas Haskell is a
9.
by zoomerang 12y ago
> that is altar upon which you sacrifice the abilitity I see statements like this all the time from people that either fundamentally misunderstand Haskell, and use to have the same misunderstandings myself. You really don't sacrific
10.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Well yes and no. GHC does a pretty good job of warning you when you're missing a potential option in a pattern match, and it's generally pretty easy to write code that avoids partial functions as a result. But still, you're r
11.
by zoomerang 12y ago
> The idea that compile-time checks is much better than runtime checks is also not obvious (Java's and other commercial languages nonsense about type safety aside - Java is no more safe than CL). Runtime checks will only trip up if
12.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Not really. The point of Haskell is not to avoid having side effects. The point of Haskell is to allow code to be referentially transparent - this makes it both easier to reason about as a developer, and easier for the runtime to optimise.
13.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Out of curiosity, have you tried F#? It's a substantially nicer language than Javascript, and there's a lot of problem domains that are far easier solved in it. People wouldn't use it because they don't want to learn Jav
14.
by zoomerang 12y ago
"Quick" - sure. HTML5 lets you spin up UIs fairly quickly. "Powerful" - I'm not so sure. Generally I find native toolkits, while requiring a bit more effort up front, generally yield much nicer user experiences.
15.
by zoomerang 12y ago
For simple apps, HTML5 works fairly well. But you quickly run into problems. My company has been working on a cross mobile application in HTML5 using Cordova. It was quick to prototype, but as we scaled up we started hitting the limitations
16.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Yes. Java can be compiled to native machine code via GCJ, and can expose a normal C++ Api. Whether you'd want to do this or not is another story. C# and Xamarin would be a far better choice for a one-size-fits-all cross platform codeba
17.
by zoomerang 12y ago
> JavaScript is the only language that let's you target every platform Ironically, the three languages you listed - Java, C#, and Objective-C are all available on all major platforms. I could write code in any of those languages and
18.
by zoomerang 12y ago
"Shitty" may not be the right word, since C#'s type system works fairly well for its problem domain. The point is that the type systems found in C# and Java are conservative and in many cases overly burdensome for the type-sa
19.
by zoomerang 12y ago
> generic is really useful Container types are the most obvious. Lists, Arrays, Dictionaries, Vectors, Stacks. You'd be hard pressed to find code that doesn't use a container type of some kind.
20.
by zoomerang 12y ago
> Am I the only one agrees with the author that generics probably do more harm than good It's really the same debate as 'Dynamic' vs 'Static' languages, since without generics your code is relying on runtime type
21.
by zoomerang 12y ago
The problem with raw SQL queries is that they don't compose. Using an ORM, I can do two things. 1. Pass around query objects, and build queries derived from others. I can also combine multiple queries into one and split the results. 2.
22.
by zoomerang 12y ago
I went into FP from the perspective of a Python/Javascript/Groovy zealot, considered FP to be a silly academic thing with no real world applications. Took me about a week to be productive in Scala in a functional style. Haskell is
23.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Having substantial experience running a startup on Scala (Not OCaml, but many of the same aspects apply) I'm going to throw my 2c in. > There is not a strong community behind OCaml. You can't take advantage of the numerous libr
24.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Monadic futures are a fairly effective solution to the problem. No callback hell, just a clean linear flow of imperative looking non-blocking code that runs concurrently but still guarantees order of execution.
25.
by zoomerang 12y ago
I can't wait for somebody to hack this and make every Tesla on the planet start honking at the same time. (Presuming there's a 3G hookup of some kind going on here)
26.
The abject failure of weak typing(techblog.realestate.com.au)
61 points by zoomerang 12y ago|16 comments
27.
by zoomerang 12y ago
Brand spanking new MotoX with Android 4.4 and Chrome. Homepage runs like a dog and scrolling is so erratic it's unusable.
28.
by zoomerang 12y ago
If you spent two years hyping vaporware and then do a major Apple-esque launch with all the fanfair while claiming to the next evolution of technology... ... you should at least attempt to make the scrollbar on your own website work correct
29.
by zoomerang 12y ago
It was fantastic for me, really helped give me the 'bootstrap' I needed to start writing functional code.
30.
by zoomerang 12y ago
I'd be expecting more in the realm of millions of messages per second, at least from a Java solution.

More ›