3 ms·
I have never seen non-trivial Haskell that didn't enable at least 1 compiler extension. Laziness is difficult to reason about. Purity makes easy things hard in
by capitalsigma 8y ago
I have never seen non-trivial Haskell that didn't enable at least 1 compiler extension. Laziness is difficult to reason about. Purity makes easy things hard in exchange for making hard things easy. You can't even make it through the standard library documentation without bumping into category theory.
Haskell is many things. Simple is not one of them.
- johnday 8y ago> I have never seen non-trivial Haskell that didn't enable at least 1 compiler extension. Language extensions are idiomatic Haskell. There is only one mainstream compiler used everywhere. Widely used extensions are a natural result when the compiler, as a testbed, can outpace the language standard. Enabling extensions is as trivial as including a standard library package. (In fact, the extensions are often better documented than the standard library, as you hint to.)