3 ms·
> I don’t think Haskell or OCaml are more verbose than Python. I love Haskell computing model, but holy hell, why is so difficult using things like State Monad
by lerax 8y ago
> I don’t think Haskell or OCaml are more verbose than Python.
I love Haskell computing model, but holy hell, why is so difficult using things like State Monad or even a trivial thing like a global counter [1] ? Why something so simple should be so difficult? Don't say it's because functional programming, Scheme/Racket is not that difficult!
Haskell and OCaml has their own problems, I agreed with you that both languages are more expressive but the code density is not necessary a good thing neither.
[1]: https://github.com/scotty-web/scotty/blob/master/examples/globalstate.hs#L68 https://github.com/scotty-web/scotty/blob/master/examples/gl...
- thinkpad20 8y agoA global counter is difficult because shared global mutable state should be difficult —- it can wreak havoc on your code. That said, if you’re really set on it it’s not particularly bad counter :: IORef Int counter = unsafePerformIO (newIORef 0) usesGlobalState :: IO () usesGlobalState = do count <- readIORef counter putStrLn (“the counter was “ ++ show count) modifyIORef (+1) counter It’s even easier in ocaml, where you’d use ref and not need to worry about the IO monad. Anecdotally, I find it incredibly rare that such a thing is desirable, when you could instead create it in an IO monad and pass it through to functions that need it. But, it’s there when necessary. And making this kind of anti pattern hard is a strength of these languages, not a weakness.