4 ms·
Try telling that thing about Haskell to actual enterprise developers. The lazy evaluation puts even experienced veterans off the track when it comes to profilin
by tmptmp 10y ago
Try telling that thing about Haskell to actual enterprise developers. The lazy evaluation puts even experienced veterans off the track when it comes to profiling/speak-leaks/debugging. Haskell support is lousy for debugging and profiling except for toy programs, period. AFAIK, Standard Charter has asked the devs to develop an entirely different language which is not lazy at all.
"Interestingly, Mu eschews Haskell’s laziness and is a strict language instead." [1]
The Haskell community is silent on getting rid of lazy-ness from it or at least making it completely and entirely optional for people.
So let me repeat this even if Haskell is good to train your mind in the comfort of your home, it is miles far from being enterprise ready.
[1] http://anil.recoil.org/papers/2011-cufp-scribe-preprint.pdf http://anil.recoil.org/papers/2011-cufp-scribe-preprint.pdf
- pjmlp 10y agoYou mean this type of enterprises? https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell_in_industry https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell_in_industry
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- LionessLover 10y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name-dropping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name-dropping For people without an argument. Because then you would have to know what those firms actually do. Read this: http://flyingfrogblog.blogspot.de/2010/05/why-is-haskell-used-so-little-in.html http://flyingfrogblog.blogspot.de/2010/05/why-is-haskell-use... It's from 2010 so things may be different - but it illustrates that you can't just drop names, you have to do your research.
- merijnv 10y agoTo be fair, John Harrop is notorious for having an axe to grind with Haskell. He's very knowledgable, but often makes gross mischaracterisations of Haskell. Which is a shame, because he knows better than that.
- pjmlp 10y agoYeah, because downvoting is so much better attitude. I at least bothered to provide a list of enterprises that bother to make use of Haskell, regardless how much of it they end up writing. Anyone can easily search for videos of online talks where people describe their experiences in the finance industry with data modeling in Haskell. Also if it would be so bad, the number of Haskell jobs outside academia wouldn't be increasing.
- tome 10y ago> you have to do your research Sure, but you have to do your research too, into what kind of person Jon Harrop is and about how seriously you should take his critiques of Haskell.
- tome 10y ago> Standard Charter has asked the devs to develop an entirely different language which is not lazy at all Yeah, but that's because it targets a pre-existing strict runtime, not because of any problems with laziness.
- tmptmp 10y agoPardon me, but why didn't they throw away that strict runtime (especially if laziness so great?) and use the already available Haskell instead, if its laziness has not got any problems? The rationale behind their decision is simple: Laziness comes with its big problems, one of them is difficult to debug and predict runtime behavior.
- tome 10y agoSorry, what do you know about Standard Chartered exactly? Have you worked there? Have you discussed this with the designers of their language (called "Mu")? Mu is strict because it was designed to target an existing strict runtime for which plenty of code was already written (in a language called Lambda, the letter before Mu in the Greek alphabet) and which was already deployed to many users through the corporation. The decision to be strict and not lazy has nothing to do with any downsides of laziness.