4 ms·

so, you're essentially gatekeeping people's opinions about the code, because they don't understand the core concepts of Haskell? I would argue that someone sho

so, you're essentially gatekeeping people's opinions about the code, because they don't understand the core concepts of Haskell? I would argue that someone should be able to understand what a function does by reading the name regardless of their understanding of the underlying language it is written in. I've noticed this type of weird expectation of understanding is very prevalent in the FP world, which makes it _harder_ for newcomers to understand code at face value.

whateveracct 7y ago
I'm saying if you don't have a working understanding of some technology, maybe think twice before negatively opining about it on HN.
- holtalanm 7y ago
  nope, you're saying people aren't allowed to even have an opinion unless they pass your own criteria beforehand. sorry, that isn't how most people operate. It would be a lot more constructive to tell them why their opinion is wrong, instead of telling them they aren't allowed to even have the opinion in the first place.
  - whateveracct 7y ago
    I never said that. My issue was with shouting uninformed opinions in a thread about a blog post by someone who actually has the experience to have such informed opinions. Sometimes you gotta stop spouting answers and start asking questions.
    - holtalanm 7y ago
      -> I never said that. Yes, you did. -> When you don't have the prerequisites, the best thing to do is to be quiet and/or learn rather than pollute the comments with your unfounded value judgements. reads as 'Shut up, your opinion doesn't matter'. I'm done here. If you want to be rude and aggressive to people and turn them off to the concept of functional programming entirely, then that's on you, I suppose.
      - whateveracct 7y ago
        If you don't know Haskell, your opinion of if Haskell code 1) has a good name or 2) has an understandable implementation doesn't matter much to me, _especially_ on a blog post meant for proficient Haskellers such as this one. In general, people can be better served lurking or asking questions or making qualified statements instead of blasting their opinion like this: > The function name means nothing, and the implementation is hard to follow.
whateveracct 7y ago
> I would argue that someone should be able to understand what a function does by reading the name regardless of their understanding of the underlying language it is written in. That's a bad litmus test imo and only encourages familiarity. If I used this to form my opinions, I would have peaced out the moment I saw >>= or traverse or foldMap I am never going to believe everything should be immediately obvious to everyone. Sometimes, you have to buy in and learn some new abstractions instead of just favoring the ones that happened to be presented to you first.
- holtalanm 7y ago
  -> everything should be immediately obvious to everyone that....is not what I said. At all.
  - whateveracct 7y ago
    > I would argue that someone should be able to understand what a function does by reading the name regardless of their understanding of the underlying language it is written in. You're saying that if someone doesn't know Haskell, they should be able to understand what functions in Haskell do by their name. Which disqualifies standard names like >>=, hoist, and more.

whateveracct 7y ago

I'm saying if you don't have a working understanding of some technology, maybe think twice before negatively opining about it on HN.

holtalanm 7y ago
nope, you're saying people aren't allowed to even have an opinion unless they pass your own criteria beforehand. sorry, that isn't how most people operate. It would be a lot more constructive to tell them why their opinion is wrong, instead of telling them they aren't allowed to even have the opinion in the first place.
- whateveracct 7y ago
  I never said that. My issue was with shouting uninformed opinions in a thread about a blog post by someone who actually has the experience to have such informed opinions. Sometimes you gotta stop spouting answers and start asking questions.
  - holtalanm 7y ago
    -> I never said that. Yes, you did. -> When you don't have the prerequisites, the best thing to do is to be quiet and/or learn rather than pollute the comments with your unfounded value judgements. reads as 'Shut up, your opinion doesn't matter'. I'm done here. If you want to be rude and aggressive to people and turn them off to the concept of functional programming entirely, then that's on you, I suppose.
    - whateveracct 7y ago
      If you don't know Haskell, your opinion of if Haskell code 1) has a good name or 2) has an understandable implementation doesn't matter much to me, _especially_ on a blog post meant for proficient Haskellers such as this one. In general, people can be better served lurking or asking questions or making qualified statements instead of blasting their opinion like this: > The function name means nothing, and the implementation is hard to follow.

whateveracct 7y ago

> I would argue that someone should be able to understand what a function does by reading the name regardless of their understanding of the underlying language it is written in. That's a bad litmus test imo and only encourages familiarity. If I used this to form my opinions, I would have peaced out the moment I saw >>= or traverse or foldMap I am never going to believe everything should be immediately obvious to everyone. Sometimes, you have to buy in and learn some new abstractions instead of just favoring the ones that happened to be presented to you first.

holtalanm 7y ago
-> everything should be immediately obvious to everyone that....is not what I said. At all.
- whateveracct 7y ago
  > I would argue that someone should be able to understand what a function does by reading the name regardless of their understanding of the underlying language it is written in. You're saying that if someone doesn't know Haskell, they should be able to understand what functions in Haskell do by their name. Which disqualifies standard names like >>=, hoist, and more.