3 ms·
That's pretty much how Haskell development works. It doesn't compile until it's what you want. TDD in Haskell and Ruby are similar, but in Haskell the T is ty
by nilved 10y ago
That's pretty much how Haskell development works. It doesn't compile until it's what you want. TDD in Haskell and Ruby are similar, but in Haskell the T is types.
- dllthomas 10y agoThis doesn't match my Haskell workflow at all. Usually, it compiles every small change, with much stubbed out with `undefined` until I get to it. When it doesn't compile, it's surprising and I learn something about the assumptions I've made.
- nilved 10y agoUndefined and type holes are equally valid approaches
- dllthomas 10y agoTo be clear, I am certainly not saying that my approach is the only (or best) one. Just that when it builds (relative to completeness) is very much at the discretion of the programmer, and despite jokes about "if it builds, it works" not everyone has that dial set all the way to one extreme.
- efnx 10y agoI write Haskell for a living and that's never been the approach I've taken. For me writing Haskell is like a conversation with the compiler, you write a bit, you listen a bit - back and forth - unless you're refactoring you don't go too long without compiling.