5 ms·

> Can we stop this JSX stuff? It's insane. It's like they saw "code is data" and reversed it (rock star developers do not believe in formal logic theory). The

by _pmf_ 11y ago

> Can we stop this JSX stuff? It's insane. It's like they saw "code is data" and reversed it (rock star developers do not believe in formal logic theory). The result is a language with all the beauty of 2001's PHP and the modernistic pretentiousness of pseudo-functional JS. Calling it React is just adding insult to injury by taking a huge crap of the solid Rx research in .NET that actually brings something new to the table.

iheartmemcache 11y ago
Cleaning up the messes that rockstar developers produce is why I can live such a comfortable life. Until they start trying to present at POPL or ICFP (at which point they'd get laughed straight out of the committee hall of peer reviewers) I really can't hate on them too much. The PhD's at Microsoft Research-Cambridge, Bart deSmet (MS-guys, I can't believe you pulled him off language development for Cortana) and the rest of the Rx team must be vomiting at what came out of their mathematically sound (often wholly proven within F*[3]) Rx work, but at the same time praising whatever deity that their name isn't attached to it. At least they're adhering to the interface signature of IObserver<T>. Digression -- but anyone who is interested in the duality (not in the mathematical sense of 'duals) between LINQ operators and monadic operators, watch this talk with de Smet[1]. It's brilliant in it's ability to reduce all of LINQ to 5 [or less, .SelectMany() is to LINQ as NAND is to gate logic; it's later proven that 3 operators are all that are required, no surprise there, Kleisli triple anyone?] and shows with great elegance the isomorphism between monadic Haskell and LINQ. (And why RX falls so naturally out of .NET as a result.) [1] https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Bart-De-Smet-MinLINQ-The-Essence-of-LINQ https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Bart-De-Smet-MinL... [2] http://community.bartdesmet.net/blogs/bart/archive/2010/01/01/the-essence-of-linq-minlinq.aspx http://community.bartdesmet.net/blogs/bart/archive/2010/01/0... [3] https://fstar-lang.org/ https://fstar-lang.org/ - to be formally presented at POPL '16. I'd offer commentary but it wouldn't do justice - any PL nerds should give that a read immediately, assuming they haven't already. MSR is without a doubt the Bell Labs of our generation.
davexunit 11y ago
>It's like they saw "code is data" and reversed it (rock star developers do not believe in formal logic theory). Yes, you've expressed my point better than I could. Other commenters have thought that I dislike JSX because I like separate, string-based templating languages, but I think those are terrible! I hate JSX from a language design standpoint. Writing HTML templates as functional code in your language of choice is a big win, but inventing a new language "with all the beauty of 2001's PHP and the modernistic pretentiousness of pseudo-functional JS" is a big lose.

by _pmf_ 11y ago

iheartmemcache 11y ago

Cleaning up the messes that rockstar developers produce is why I can live such a comfortable life. Until they start trying to present at POPL or ICFP (at which point they'd get laughed straight out of the committee hall of peer reviewers) I really can't hate on them too much. The PhD's at Microsoft Research-Cambridge, Bart deSmet (MS-guys, I can't believe you pulled him off language development for Cortana) and the rest of the Rx team must be vomiting at what came out of their mathematically sound (often wholly proven within F*[3]) Rx work, but at the same time praising whatever deity that their name isn't attached to it. At least they're adhering to the interface signature of IObserver<T>. Digression -- but anyone who is interested in the duality (not in the mathematical sense of 'duals) between LINQ operators and monadic operators, watch this talk with de Smet[1]. It's brilliant in it's ability to reduce all of LINQ to 5 [or less, .SelectMany() is to LINQ as NAND is to gate logic; it's later proven that 3 operators are all that are required, no surprise there, Kleisli triple anyone?] and shows with great elegance the isomorphism between monadic Haskell and LINQ. (And why RX falls so naturally out of .NET as a result.) [1] https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Bart-De-Smet-MinLINQ-The-Essence-of-LINQ https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Bart-De-Smet-MinL... [2] http://community.bartdesmet.net/blogs/bart/archive/2010/01/01/the-essence-of-linq-minlinq.aspx http://community.bartdesmet.net/blogs/bart/archive/2010/01/0... [3] https://fstar-lang.org/ https://fstar-lang.org/ - to be formally presented at POPL '16. I'd offer commentary but it wouldn't do justice - any PL nerds should give that a read immediately, assuming they haven't already. MSR is without a doubt the Bell Labs of our generation.

davexunit 11y ago

>It's like they saw "code is data" and reversed it (rock star developers do not believe in formal logic theory). Yes, you've expressed my point better than I could. Other commenters have thought that I dislike JSX because I like separate, string-based templating languages, but I think those are terrible! I hate JSX from a language design standpoint. Writing HTML templates as functional code in your language of choice is a big win, but inventing a new language "with all the beauty of 2001's PHP and the modernistic pretentiousness of pseudo-functional JS" is a big lose.