8 ms·

On being a PhD student of Robert Harper

130 points by JoelMcCracken 5y ago

eatonphil 5y ago
Great read! Your casual reminder that there's a group of SML-ers who hang out on Reddit [1]. [0] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-functional-programming/article/on-being-a-phd-student-of-robert-harper/B68BCF31384084D9FDCB17A7DF1DE7A0 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-functiona... [1] http://reddit.com/r/sml http://reddit.com/r/sml
- nesarkvechnep 5y ago
  I should give the language another chance. Maybe some day I would teach people functional programming through SML. I think the fingers on both hands are enough to count the people in my country who have heard of SML.
JoelMcCracken 5y ago
Dr Harper has had a huge impact. Reading these experiences is very cool.
jstrieb 5y ago
Can't speak to graduate student experiences, but I did take Dr. Harper's principles of programming languages class as an undergrad. The course was ambitious and moved at a breakneck pace, and Dr. Harper could be a whirlwind in lecture. As some of the anecdotes mention, he's pretty opinionated. He'd often go on intense (albeit well-informed), tangential rants, particularly about Python. Personally, I would have preferred a less comprehensive course with more time to let some of the abstract ideas settle, but I can imagine his attitude and approach being well-suited to energetic graduate advising. For those curious about the material, we covered a significant portion of his Practical Foundations of Programming Languages book: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/2nded.pdf https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/2nded.pdf
- grumpyprole 5y ago
  > He'd often go on intense (albeit well-informed) tangential rants, particularly about Python. As an academic, it must be soul destroying to see the world dominated by ad-hoc efforts like Python. Just like Linux, it was one persons hobby project that repeated old mistakes and now threatens the existence of argubly better technology.
  - bruce343434 5y ago
    You don't have to be an academic for that. The world is full of imperfections. Marketing and luck are bigger factors than merit.
  - varjag 5y ago
    Nothing was threatened by Linux as better technology didn't really exist. It was past Symbolics or Xerox Alto times.
    - grumpyprole 5y ago
      Commercial Unix like Solaris and QNX were far better engineered than Linux ever was. Even Minix, which was used to bootstrap Linux, had a micro kernel design.
      - gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
        Minix was so good that Intel lifted the codebase (within the terms of the FOSS license, not telling the author) for their management backdoo- uhh engine.
        turminal 5y ago
        We can only speculate, but it's very unlikely this had anything to do with how good minix is.
      - varjag 5y ago
        Only someone who never used Minix would seriously argue it was better in any respect.
Micoloth 5y ago
I’m just some guy that works as a software engineer (i don’t even have a phd) but I’ve always been interested in Type theory. So, a few years back, i found on youtube the lectures Bob Harper gave at the OPLSS, and watched them all. It’s been a revelation for me! It’s truly an experience, and I’ve been a straight up Bob Harper fan ever since. This is how all lectures should be given. The passion he has for these topics is completely evident! Before, i was vaguely interestes in type theory. Since then, i’ve been really into type theory, and I’ve gotten deeper and deeper into it. So nice to see this homage to him!
- exdsq 5y ago
  I don't have a degree but attended OPLSS last year and it was really fun! Worth attending :)
- jkhdigital 5y ago
  Similar experience—I came across his HoTT lectures on YouTube and was absolutely blown away by how clear and concise his teaching was. Absolutely transformed my understanding of the subject in just the first lecture.
- sanxiyn 5y ago
  OPLSS is what education should be: everyone is there to teach and to learn, because it's voluntary and you don't get anything else such as a piece of parchment. What we call education is gross perversion of it.
- madarcho 5y ago
  I think I might be in a similar boat. I've an interest in Type Theory, but rarely get to really connect day to day work with the fun bits. Interestingly I have never heard of Robert Harper, so I will be looking at those lectures with great interest. Instead, I have Benjamin C. Pierce's fantastic "Types and Programming Languages" book (still working my way through it bit by bit), and I happened to get one of the most impactful talks of my life from Derek Dreyer: How to Give Talks that People Can Follow. I still use those 20 minutes of advice to this day. I'm strangely excited to see both their names as authors on this article, and I believe that tells me a lot about what kind of passionate speaking I can expect from Robert Harper!
zerr 5y ago
Quite unpopular in the Haskell community as I recall.
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  He hasn't blogged in a while, so it's fine. MLers and Haskellers both think Agda is very beautiful, and so I think this diffuses things a bit. Also his former advisee Jon Sterling is doing domain theory stuff now, so hah!
- JoelMcCracken 5y ago
  He doesn’t like Haskell for various reasons. But I think Haskell devs respect his work!
throwaway81523 5y ago
HoTT is too big for my tiny brain, but Harper's book Practical Foundations of Programming Languages (PFPL) was hugely informative and is reasonably accessible to programmers who like some theory and consider themselves to be language geeks. The full text of the first edition was online. Now there's a second edition that is mostly online with a few parts missing, but that still looks good: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/ https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/
brianolson 5y ago
I was an undergrad at CMU and Harper broke the curriculum. The Computer Science undergrad curriculum was that one should take Programming Languages (15-212) before taking the course on Compilers (15-312). But, for a couple years they offered 212 in an alternate Java version instead of the usual ML. I wanted to take it in a _practical_ language instead of a horrible useless language, so I took the 212-Java version. Harper refused to accept that as a prereq when he was teaching 312 Compilers. Yes, I'm still bitter (20+ years later), and I still think ML is an annoying useless academic language no undergrad should be subjected to.
- gchadwick 5y ago
  I learnt ML as an undergrad. I felt it was an excellent introduction to the key concepts of functional programming (ADTs, partial application, type inference, lazy data structures, pure functions/lack of mutability etc). Would I use it in production code, indeed have I even touched it since undergrad? No Have I found the concepts I learnt via it highly valuable? Yes Writing compilers maps pretty well to ML, especially for simple/toy compilers you might write as an undergrad, so I can see why he might insist upon it, allowing him to start with the concepts already learnt as a base.

130 points by JoelMcCracken 5y ago

Great read! Your casual reminder that there's a group of SML-ers who hang out on Reddit [1]. [0] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-functional-programming/article/on-being-a-phd-student-of-robert-harper/B68BCF31384084D9FDCB17A7DF1DE7A0 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-functiona... [1] http://reddit.com/r/sml http://reddit.com/r/sml

nesarkvechnep 5y ago
I should give the language another chance. Maybe some day I would teach people functional programming through SML. I think the fingers on both hands are enough to count the people in my country who have heard of SML.

JoelMcCracken 5y ago

Dr Harper has had a huge impact. Reading these experiences is very cool.

jstrieb 5y ago

Can't speak to graduate student experiences, but I did take Dr. Harper's principles of programming languages class as an undergrad. The course was ambitious and moved at a breakneck pace, and Dr. Harper could be a whirlwind in lecture. As some of the anecdotes mention, he's pretty opinionated. He'd often go on intense (albeit well-informed), tangential rants, particularly about Python. Personally, I would have preferred a less comprehensive course with more time to let some of the abstract ideas settle, but I can imagine his attitude and approach being well-suited to energetic graduate advising. For those curious about the material, we covered a significant portion of his Practical Foundations of Programming Languages book: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/2nded.pdf https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/2nded.pdf

grumpyprole 5y ago
> He'd often go on intense (albeit well-informed) tangential rants, particularly about Python. As an academic, it must be soul destroying to see the world dominated by ad-hoc efforts like Python. Just like Linux, it was one persons hobby project that repeated old mistakes and now threatens the existence of argubly better technology.
- bruce343434 5y ago
  You don't have to be an academic for that. The world is full of imperfections. Marketing and luck are bigger factors than merit.
- varjag 5y ago
  Nothing was threatened by Linux as better technology didn't really exist. It was past Symbolics or Xerox Alto times.
  - grumpyprole 5y ago
    Commercial Unix like Solaris and QNX were far better engineered than Linux ever was. Even Minix, which was used to bootstrap Linux, had a micro kernel design.
    - gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
      Minix was so good that Intel lifted the codebase (within the terms of the FOSS license, not telling the author) for their management backdoo- uhh engine.
      - turminal 5y ago
        We can only speculate, but it's very unlikely this had anything to do with how good minix is.
    - varjag 5y ago
      Only someone who never used Minix would seriously argue it was better in any respect.

Micoloth 5y ago

I’m just some guy that works as a software engineer (i don’t even have a phd) but I’ve always been interested in Type theory. So, a few years back, i found on youtube the lectures Bob Harper gave at the OPLSS, and watched them all. It’s been a revelation for me! It’s truly an experience, and I’ve been a straight up Bob Harper fan ever since. This is how all lectures should be given. The passion he has for these topics is completely evident! Before, i was vaguely interestes in type theory. Since then, i’ve been really into type theory, and I’ve gotten deeper and deeper into it. So nice to see this homage to him!

exdsq 5y ago
I don't have a degree but attended OPLSS last year and it was really fun! Worth attending :)
jkhdigital 5y ago
Similar experience—I came across his HoTT lectures on YouTube and was absolutely blown away by how clear and concise his teaching was. Absolutely transformed my understanding of the subject in just the first lecture.
sanxiyn 5y ago
OPLSS is what education should be: everyone is there to teach and to learn, because it's voluntary and you don't get anything else such as a piece of parchment. What we call education is gross perversion of it.
madarcho 5y ago
I think I might be in a similar boat. I've an interest in Type Theory, but rarely get to really connect day to day work with the fun bits. Interestingly I have never heard of Robert Harper, so I will be looking at those lectures with great interest. Instead, I have Benjamin C. Pierce's fantastic "Types and Programming Languages" book (still working my way through it bit by bit), and I happened to get one of the most impactful talks of my life from Derek Dreyer: How to Give Talks that People Can Follow. I still use those 20 minutes of advice to this day. I'm strangely excited to see both their names as authors on this article, and I believe that tells me a lot about what kind of passionate speaking I can expect from Robert Harper!

zerr 5y ago

Quite unpopular in the Haskell community as I recall.

Ericson2314 5y ago
He hasn't blogged in a while, so it's fine. MLers and Haskellers both think Agda is very beautiful, and so I think this diffuses things a bit. Also his former advisee Jon Sterling is doing domain theory stuff now, so hah!
JoelMcCracken 5y ago
He doesn’t like Haskell for various reasons. But I think Haskell devs respect his work!

throwaway81523 5y ago

HoTT is too big for my tiny brain, but Harper's book Practical Foundations of Programming Languages (PFPL) was hugely informative and is reasonably accessible to programmers who like some theory and consider themselves to be language geeks. The full text of the first edition was online. Now there's a second edition that is mostly online with a few parts missing, but that still looks good: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/ https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/pfpl/

brianolson 5y ago

I was an undergrad at CMU and Harper broke the curriculum. The Computer Science undergrad curriculum was that one should take Programming Languages (15-212) before taking the course on Compilers (15-312). But, for a couple years they offered 212 in an alternate Java version instead of the usual ML. I wanted to take it in a _practical_ language instead of a horrible useless language, so I took the 212-Java version. Harper refused to accept that as a prereq when he was teaching 312 Compilers. Yes, I'm still bitter (20+ years later), and I still think ML is an annoying useless academic language no undergrad should be subjected to.

gchadwick 5y ago
I learnt ML as an undergrad. I felt it was an excellent introduction to the key concepts of functional programming (ADTs, partial application, type inference, lazy data structures, pure functions/lack of mutability etc). Would I use it in production code, indeed have I even touched it since undergrad? No Have I found the concepts I learnt via it highly valuable? Yes Writing compilers maps pretty well to ML, especially for simple/toy compilers you might write as an undergrad, so I can see why he might insist upon it, allowing him to start with the concepts already learnt as a base.