4 ms·
I would really like to hear more about this. I also do type-oriented programming in OO languages, such as Java. The code naturally falls into place, too, but it
by mushishi 15y ago
I would really like to hear more about this. I also do type-oriented programming in OO languages, such as Java. The code naturally falls into place, too, but it's just because of Java's verboseness, you end up a lot of hand-waving. But I don't think it differs much from how I would program in functional style, say, in Scala.
- marshallp 15y agoit all depends on your problem. for gui programming oo code is natural, for transforming complex data structures ml is natural. transforming xml is a horrible mess in java, so xslt is recommended, and xslt is pretty much ml (one of the creators of haskell was a contributor to xslt). it's not matter of java verboseness, even python or lisp isn't well suited to dealing with complex datastructures because they lack the pattern matching over compiler enforced datastructure machinery.
- jberryman 15y agoThis talk by Simon PJ on type classes might be good http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/MDCC-TechTalk-Classes-Jim-but-not-as-we-know-them http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/MDCC-TechTalk-Classes-Jim-but...
- mushishi 15y agoI actually have that on a browser tab, and will take a look at it. I know some Haskell (have read maybe 4 books but haven't really ever wrote it).