3 ms·

> And here's the arrogant, self-important attitude that turned me off of Haskell. Haskellers are usually out to convince that Haskell is for most programmers,

by Peaker 9y ago

> And here's the arrogant, self-important attitude that turned me off of Haskell. Haskellers are usually out to convince that Haskell is for most programmers, and that "need PhD to use it" is a myth. It is people frustrated by the (difficult) learning curve of Haskell that say such things.

jlarocco 9y ago
> It is people frustrated by the (difficult) learning curve of Haskell that say such things. And there it is again. I haven't drank the Haskell kool-aid, so I must not be smart enough to use it properly.
- codygman 9y ago
  > If one is able to write code in Haskell it tells a lot about them, and he might be a better programmer than one who writes in Ada or C++. - solomatov > And here's the arrogant, self-important attitude that turned me off of Haskell. - jlarocco > It is people frustrated by the (difficult) learning curve of Haskell that say such things. - peaker > And there it is again. I haven't drank the Haskell kool-aid, so I must not be smart enough to use it properly. Firstly, reading "people frustrated by the difficult learning curve of haskell say such things" as "I haven't drank the Haskell kool-aid, so I must not be smart enough to use it properly." is a very uncharitable interpretation. Secondly, I believe solomatov and Peaker's comments could be written more unambiguously as follows (though I thought they were precise enough): solamatov commment rewrite: Someone who can write Haskell might be a better programmer than programmers who use other languages because Haskell is difficult to learn. peaker comment rewrite: People frustrated by the difficulty of the Haskell learning curve say things such as "Someone who managed to learn Haskell to the point they can write code in it have proven their worth more than those who use easier to learn languages" So jlarocco, could you still call classify these comments and the thought processes behind them arrogant and self important? Is there anything that would turn you off of them?
- Peaker 9y ago
  Haskell is difficult to learn! For virtually everyone. Especially people who already learned more mainstream languages, because it is so different. When I learned Haskell I was frustrated by its difficult learning process until I stuck with it long enough, as did almost all who passed the learning curve. How do you get any reference to "smart enough" out of this? "persistent enough" is definitely relevant for learning Haskell, though.
jonathanstrange 9y ago
I started to learn Haskell several times and decided every time that it's not really worth effort and time spent. Technology should adapt to humans, not humans to technology. IMHO Haskell exemplifies the latter.
- Peaker 9y ago
  Haskell is quite well adapted to the humans that like using it :-) Partially it's a matter of taste. I hated Haskell syntax in the first few weeks ("Why did they have to differ on this?!") but later I realized it's objectively nicer for expressing the things Haskell expresses and much prefer it. Then there's a lot of bad tutorials out there. And finally the tooling / IDEs aren't great for discovering the language and type system. I don't see significant ways Haskell itself could be more geared towards humans than it already is. It brings simple mathematical concepts and abstractions to the forefront - and simple is not easy, but is worth it.

by Peaker 9y ago

jlarocco 9y ago

> It is people frustrated by the (difficult) learning curve of Haskell that say such things. And there it is again. I haven't drank the Haskell kool-aid, so I must not be smart enough to use it properly.

codygman 9y ago
> If one is able to write code in Haskell it tells a lot about them, and he might be a better programmer than one who writes in Ada or C++. - solomatov > And here's the arrogant, self-important attitude that turned me off of Haskell. - jlarocco > It is people frustrated by the (difficult) learning curve of Haskell that say such things. - peaker > And there it is again. I haven't drank the Haskell kool-aid, so I must not be smart enough to use it properly. Firstly, reading "people frustrated by the difficult learning curve of haskell say such things" as "I haven't drank the Haskell kool-aid, so I must not be smart enough to use it properly." is a very uncharitable interpretation. Secondly, I believe solomatov and Peaker's comments could be written more unambiguously as follows (though I thought they were precise enough): solamatov commment rewrite: Someone who can write Haskell might be a better programmer than programmers who use other languages because Haskell is difficult to learn. peaker comment rewrite: People frustrated by the difficulty of the Haskell learning curve say things such as "Someone who managed to learn Haskell to the point they can write code in it have proven their worth more than those who use easier to learn languages" So jlarocco, could you still call classify these comments and the thought processes behind them arrogant and self important? Is there anything that would turn you off of them?
Peaker 9y ago
Haskell is difficult to learn! For virtually everyone. Especially people who already learned more mainstream languages, because it is so different. When I learned Haskell I was frustrated by its difficult learning process until I stuck with it long enough, as did almost all who passed the learning curve. How do you get any reference to "smart enough" out of this? "persistent enough" is definitely relevant for learning Haskell, though.

jonathanstrange 9y ago

I started to learn Haskell several times and decided every time that it's not really worth effort and time spent. Technology should adapt to humans, not humans to technology. IMHO Haskell exemplifies the latter.

Peaker 9y ago
Haskell is quite well adapted to the humans that like using it :-) Partially it's a matter of taste. I hated Haskell syntax in the first few weeks ("Why did they have to differ on this?!") but later I realized it's objectively nicer for expressing the things Haskell expresses and much prefer it. Then there's a lot of bad tutorials out there. And finally the tooling / IDEs aren't great for discovering the language and type system. I don't see significant ways Haskell itself could be more geared towards humans than it already is. It brings simple mathematical concepts and abstractions to the forefront - and simple is not easy, but is worth it.