4 ms·
Your first point is also true for procedural programming languages, but at least in Haskell you know that if something is, say, a functor then you know what sor
by pera 4y ago
Your first point is also true for procedural programming languages, but at least in Haskell you know that if something is, say, a functor then you know what sort of things you can do with that value. I think it should be possible for an IDE to suggest functions if you used the reverse application operator:
[1, 2, 3] &
^-- suggestion here
Unfortunately this wouldn't be very idiomatic in Haskell, maybe in Idris with |> this would make more sense?
- still_grokking 4y ago> if something is, say, a functor then you know what sort of things you can do with that value Sure. Because you memorized all the functor methods and remembered that there is a functor instance defined for the data type at hand… ;-) > Unfortunately this wouldn't be very idiomatic in Haskell, maybe in Idris with |> this would make more sense? Or you could just admit that the "OOP style syntax" is superior. (I'm not saying that OOP is superior, though)