3 ms·
Rust actually has a lot of Gos spirit in terms of being practical and consistently engineered, but also embraces FP. The issue is that Go is philosophically tie
by ilovecaching 8y ago
Rust actually has a lot of Gos spirit in terms of being practical and consistently engineered, but also embraces FP. The issue is that Go is philosophically tied to concreteness. You solve your specific problem each time from scratch. FP is about raising your problem to a higher level of abstraction and solving it there. In Haskell this is you taking your domain and raising it into a problem of category theory, and then using all the nice things we know about transformations in category theory to solve the abstract problem and lift it back down to earth, such that we can take advantage of any sort of mathematical, general solution. so in a sense Go + FP is like adding two diametrically apposed philosophies.
- dnautics 8y ago> FP is about raising your problem to a higher level of abstraction and solving it there Haskell and lisp are like that for sure, but more blue collar FP languages like erlang ate "basically FP so that you get memory safety and easy multithreading".
- pyrale 8y agoI get paid for haskell and I don't use category theory. No one in my team does and neither do a significant share of the people in the industry. I don't know what outsiders think about us, but 90% of the value derives from the simple things : constructing simple datatypes easily, a world-class type checker and some great libs that require little knowledge to be used, like Servant or Aeson. Sure, there are fancier things if you want to go beyond that, but you can be productive with the bare minimum of Haskell, as Elm shows.