6 ms·

Ironically, Haskell pioneers exactly in programming scientific research while the rest of the languages focus more on the linguistics rather than the science.

by hopia 7y ago

alexashka 7y ago
Haskell is the epitome of linguistics - it took a bet on an arbitrary set of conditions - lazy evaluation, immutability. These linguistic choices inform the rest of the language - monads were only invented as an escape hatch out of the prison the language designers put themselves into! If you think we ought to spend some more decades researching how to walk using our hands instead of our feet for getting around and are excited about the upcoming scientific literature regarding hand strength exercises required and all the rest of it, no problem. Most everyone else is walking using their feet just fine - they are solving other problems, namely real world problems that involve walking places.
- youerbt 7y ago
  Ah, the classic - "we are producing REAL software over here". Always reminds me of this: https://steenschledermann.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/no-thanks-were-too-busy1.jpg https://steenschledermann.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/no-tha...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- hopia 7y ago
  Walk all you want, meanwhile Haskell is developing ways to fly.
  - alexashka 7y ago
    This is as good time as any to inform us of the exciting breakthroughs Haskell has made. When and where can I see a demonstration of flight? To avoid misunderstanding - I'm assuming you believe Haskell has flown in the past 3 decades already and that it's not that Haskell has been preparing for flight for the past 3 decades? I'd be interested to know which accomplishments you consider to be flight, why and please provide some commercial airlines that are making use of Haskell plane fleets. My favorite Haskell airplane is Idris - it is a paper airplane that I got much joy out of throwing around.
  - ncmncm 7y ago
    If by "developing ways to fly", you mean "crawling on its knees while flapping its arms", then OK. When I see an (admittedly admirably concise) Haskell program get ten times longer just to approach the speed of the most obvious expression in C++ or even C, it leaves me uninspired. I want a language where the cleaner the program is, the faster it is. It seems like only C++ is really even trying. (Rust might step up, once it matures. Or might not.) With Dennart Scaling wholly dead, and Moore's Law petering out, there will be lots of room for better ways to use lots of cores, GPU units, and FPGAs (with plenty of macro cells) reconfigured at runtime, to make better use of what logic we can fit. C++ is only taking baby steps into that brave new world, but I don't see anyone else doing even that much. In the meantime, we have a bunch of cores to keep busy doing actually useful work, and decreasing room for actively wasteful languages. Haskell has had plenty to teach us, but it will not be the language that flies.
    - lmm 7y ago
      > When I see an (admittedly admirably concise) Haskell program get ten times longer just to approach the speed of the most obvious expression in C++ or even C, it leaves me uninspired. Well, if the most obvious expression in C++ or C was a hundred times longer then that's still a win for Haskell. Particularly when the performance-critical parts are usually a tiny fraction of any given program. Frankly I don't think the industry should even start worrying about performance yet though, given how much difficulty we still have with producing correct software.
      - ncmncm 7y ago
        I have not seen any example of a program that would be a hundred, or even ten, or five, times longer in C++. Not worrying about performance is a luxury that those of us who face stringent requirements are often not afforded. My experience using the WWW indicates that many, many sites demonstrate their contempt for me (and you, if you could perceive that) by ignoring it.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
  Haskell has crazy amounts of wild evolution and experimentation with new ways to do a programming language. Look at the number of language extensions present in a typical non-toy haskell system. It's not just a single arbitrary set of conditions. I'd consider it more as a highly successful platform for PL research that people happen to build stuff in. If that's not progress, I don't know what is.
- durdsworth 7y ago
  Monads were not invented to support the needs of Haskell. The concept predates even the existence of microprocessors. Haskell simply recognizes the applicability of that existing mathematical concept to an aspect (in fact various unrelated aspects) of programming. This isn't really a feature unique to Haskell.

Ironically, Haskell pioneers exactly in programming scientific research while the rest of the languages focus more on the linguistics rather than the science.

by hopia 7y ago

Ironically, Haskell pioneers exactly in programming scientific research while the rest of the languages focus more on the linguistics rather than the science.

alexashka 7y ago

Haskell is the epitome of linguistics - it took a bet on an arbitrary set of conditions - lazy evaluation, immutability. These linguistic choices inform the rest of the language - monads were only invented as an escape hatch out of the prison the language designers put themselves into! If you think we ought to spend some more decades researching how to walk using our hands instead of our feet for getting around and are excited about the upcoming scientific literature regarding hand strength exercises required and all the rest of it, no problem. Most everyone else is walking using their feet just fine - they are solving other problems, namely real world problems that involve walking places.

youerbt 7y ago
Ah, the classic - "we are producing REAL software over here". Always reminds me of this: https://steenschledermann.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/no-thanks-were-too-busy1.jpg https://steenschledermann.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/no-tha...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
hopia 7y ago
Walk all you want, meanwhile Haskell is developing ways to fly.
- alexashka 7y ago
  This is as good time as any to inform us of the exciting breakthroughs Haskell has made. When and where can I see a demonstration of flight? To avoid misunderstanding - I'm assuming you believe Haskell has flown in the past 3 decades already and that it's not that Haskell has been preparing for flight for the past 3 decades? I'd be interested to know which accomplishments you consider to be flight, why and please provide some commercial airlines that are making use of Haskell plane fleets. My favorite Haskell airplane is Idris - it is a paper airplane that I got much joy out of throwing around.
- ncmncm 7y ago
  If by "developing ways to fly", you mean "crawling on its knees while flapping its arms", then OK. When I see an (admittedly admirably concise) Haskell program get ten times longer just to approach the speed of the most obvious expression in C++ or even C, it leaves me uninspired. I want a language where the cleaner the program is, the faster it is. It seems like only C++ is really even trying. (Rust might step up, once it matures. Or might not.) With Dennart Scaling wholly dead, and Moore's Law petering out, there will be lots of room for better ways to use lots of cores, GPU units, and FPGAs (with plenty of macro cells) reconfigured at runtime, to make better use of what logic we can fit. C++ is only taking baby steps into that brave new world, but I don't see anyone else doing even that much. In the meantime, we have a bunch of cores to keep busy doing actually useful work, and decreasing room for actively wasteful languages. Haskell has had plenty to teach us, but it will not be the language that flies.
  - lmm 7y ago
    > When I see an (admittedly admirably concise) Haskell program get ten times longer just to approach the speed of the most obvious expression in C++ or even C, it leaves me uninspired. Well, if the most obvious expression in C++ or C was a hundred times longer then that's still a win for Haskell. Particularly when the performance-critical parts are usually a tiny fraction of any given program. Frankly I don't think the industry should even start worrying about performance yet though, given how much difficulty we still have with producing correct software.
    - ncmncm 7y ago
      I have not seen any example of a program that would be a hundred, or even ten, or five, times longer in C++. Not worrying about performance is a luxury that those of us who face stringent requirements are often not afforded. My experience using the WWW indicates that many, many sites demonstrate their contempt for me (and you, if you could perceive that) by ignoring it.
6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
Haskell has crazy amounts of wild evolution and experimentation with new ways to do a programming language. Look at the number of language extensions present in a typical non-toy haskell system. It's not just a single arbitrary set of conditions. I'd consider it more as a highly successful platform for PL research that people happen to build stuff in. If that's not progress, I don't know what is.
durdsworth 7y ago
Monads were not invented to support the needs of Haskell. The concept predates even the existence of microprocessors. Haskell simply recognizes the applicability of that existing mathematical concept to an aspect (in fact various unrelated aspects) of programming. This isn't really a feature unique to Haskell.