3 ms·
How about: a typical typescript project does not start off with a dozen compiler pragmas non-trivially changing language semantics? Or: no matter their backgrou
by patrec 7y ago
How about: a typical typescript project does not start off with a dozen compiler pragmas non-trivially changing language semantics? Or: no matter their background, it will take at least 10x more time to spin up new developers with Haskell than typescript?
- tome 7y agoHaskell language extensions do not change the language semantics. They extend the semantics with additional functionality. Existing code does not change its meaning when you enable an extension.
- patrec 7y agoStrict. Not a change in language semantics at all.
- tome 7y agoAh, great counterexample! StrictData is another. Do you know any others that change language semantics non-trivially? I would roughly define "non-trivially" to mean "correct programs become incorrect". By the way, I'm particularly interested because I am writing about Haskell myths. I have a very rough draft at http://h2.jaguarpaw.co.uk/posts/haskell-myths/ http://h2.jaguarpaw.co.uk/posts/haskell-myths/
- cannabis_sam 7y agoThere’s also QuasiQuoter which can make valid code with list comprehensions not compile, but it doesn’t just compile it, it gets stuck looking for the end tag. Not sure if that qualifies :P