4 ms·

Is Haskell still a preferred introductory language to enter the Functional Paradigm with? Or do you think other alternatives do a better job at that than Haskel

Is Haskell still a preferred introductory language to enter the Functional Paradigm with? Or do you think other alternatives do a better job at that than Haskell ? I'm learning Scheme with the SICP Book ATM, and am confused where to go next to get better at Functional thinking(and programming).

simplecomplex 8y ago
Haskell. If programming languages were mountains, Haskell is Everest. Conquer it and other languages can be mastered in your sleep. Go further.
- frabert 8y ago
  I never did alpinism, I guess Everest would be a good place to start with...
  - TremendousJudge 8y ago
    it's not even in the Alps!
    - n4r9 8y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaineering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaineering "Mountaineering is often called Alpinism, especially in European languages"
      - mcguire 8y ago
        "Alpinism" sounds like a disease.
- pyrale 8y ago
  I'm not sure the mountain allegory is fitting here. Haskell is not that hard to get into: there are hard parts but they are totally optional and avoidable. Also for newcomer who want to get in fp but find Haskell intimidating, you can try Elm, it's tailored to cater to beginners.
merijnv 8y ago
> Is Haskell still a preferred introductory language to enter the Functional Paradigm with? I say yes, for a two reasons. 1) Enforced purity means you can't just fall back to your old imperative style as coding and use it as a crutch, and 2) it's the "most different" functional language, it will expose you to more than just functional programming and thus teach you more. Learning Haskell will teach you: pure functional programming, algebraic datatypes, laziness, and ML-style types. All of which are worthwhile imo. ML-style typing and algebraic datatypes you could also learn in F#/Ocaml/SML, but pure FP and laziness are two things that are very much worth learning and only apply to a handful of languages. And of that handful Haskell is really the only one with an ecosystem and community that makes it practical to write actual projects in.
- sus_007 8y ago
  Thanks for the detailed explanation. I'll surely learn Haskell now, after I'm done with this book.

simplecomplex 8y ago

Haskell. If programming languages were mountains, Haskell is Everest. Conquer it and other languages can be mastered in your sleep. Go further.

frabert 8y ago
I never did alpinism, I guess Everest would be a good place to start with...
- TremendousJudge 8y ago
  it's not even in the Alps!
  - n4r9 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaineering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaineering "Mountaineering is often called Alpinism, especially in European languages"
    - mcguire 8y ago
      "Alpinism" sounds like a disease.
pyrale 8y ago
I'm not sure the mountain allegory is fitting here. Haskell is not that hard to get into: there are hard parts but they are totally optional and avoidable. Also for newcomer who want to get in fp but find Haskell intimidating, you can try Elm, it's tailored to cater to beginners.

merijnv 8y ago

> Is Haskell still a preferred introductory language to enter the Functional Paradigm with? I say yes, for a two reasons. 1) Enforced purity means you can't just fall back to your old imperative style as coding and use it as a crutch, and 2) it's the "most different" functional language, it will expose you to more than just functional programming and thus teach you more. Learning Haskell will teach you: pure functional programming, algebraic datatypes, laziness, and ML-style types. All of which are worthwhile imo. ML-style typing and algebraic datatypes you could also learn in F#/Ocaml/SML, but pure FP and laziness are two things that are very much worth learning and only apply to a handful of languages. And of that handful Haskell is really the only one with an ecosystem and community that makes it practical to write actual projects in.

sus_007 8y ago
Thanks for the detailed explanation. I'll surely learn Haskell now, after I'm done with this book.