3 ms·
When the blub programmers look up the ladder, they see a bunch of type theory, monads, and laziness. They don't see the use for these features as they think in
by rev_null 10y ago
When the blub programmers look up the ladder, they see a bunch of type theory, monads, and laziness. They don't see the use for these features as they think in blub.
- jcranmer 10y agoIf you tried to teach basic arithmetic in elementary school by means of axiomatic set theory, you'd put entire generations of people off of math. It is not a virtue to require people to take the hardest path to a concept in the name of purity, and it is certainly not a virtue to be condescending in the failure of others to do so. Take as an example call/cc. If I tried to explain that to a--as you put it--blub programmer, I would probably get glazed eyes in response. If I instead tried to explain it via means of a yield operator (à la Python), I would much more likely get someone who could think of use cases where they would want to use it in their own code. The limitations are not in the blub programmer, it's in the teacher for assuming that blub programmers are incapable of learning hard concepts.
- sh_tinh_hair 10y agoExactly what I rail against in Rust. What do you see when you toss a coin friendo?
- the_duke 10y agoThe type system in Haskell and other ML family languages is incredibly powerful, but it takes a long time for most to intuitively grasp functors, monads, monad transformers,... It's a huge entry barrier.