3 ms·

So let me get this straight: You don't like Haskell because someone used it to write an inefficient quicksort example online?

• xiphias2 6y ago
  Not somebody, it was on the home page as a use case of how much better Haskell is than other languages. The default libraries are extremely inefficient. Generally if I use Python/Ruby I can get a 50x slow down that is accepted, but with Haskell it can be more, as it's very hard to think about what the compiler does (memory usage can blow up easily).
  • reddit_clone 6y ago
    To be fair, that code is to illustrate the beauty of the language rather than efficiency. (Also the fibonacci sequence using 'zip'. Blew my mind.) Haskell folks are fairly upfront about possible performance issues. Lazy evaluation comes with its own set of tradeoffs. You can write very inefficient code in C++ if your algorithm isn't efficient.
    • xiphias2 6y ago
      I still don’t see any tradeoffs explained, quite the opposite is on the home page: ,,The purity of Haskell code makes it easy to fuse chains of functions together, allowing for performance benefits.’’ Having something ,,beautiful’’ and inefficient is the problem I’m writing about. The language itself is guiding people to inefficiency. I haven’t felt this with C++, so I’m not sure what you are talking about: usually simple / pretty code runs fast there, and more complex code runs slower.