3 ms·

I would also disagree with that, but maybe not as much as the other guy. I had the pleasure of being able to use Haskell "in anger" for about a year. Still my

by fho 3y ago

I would also disagree with that, but maybe not as much as the other guy. I had the pleasure of being able to use Haskell "in anger" for about a year. Still my favorite language to toy around with, but would not want to use it for work again. One take away is that half of the time Haskell code "just works". You write algorithms as you think they should be and often the resulting binary is "good enough™". The other half you spend in the trenches hunting down memory leaks because some thunk was not evaluated and your program is amassing unevaluater expressions until it dies :-)

EdwardDiego 3y ago
The other half is the magic that worries me ;) And I'm not picking on Haskell here, I've lost countless hours to weird Spring failures when multiple annotations on one class or method interact poorly and produce a stack-trace deep in the bowels of Spring's annotation processors. Or, well, gestures at Hibernate in general Likewise, Django classes that defy type annotations because they override __new__ and inject nested classes into types, or queries over joins where the join logic between attribute A and type B is magically parsed from an undeclared keyword argument like "A__B__filter" that includes attributes, types and actions in one convenient keyword that no IDE can predict. Like your unevaluated thunks, trying to figure out why "Foo__Bar__bomb_baghdad" didn't actually bomb Baghdad takes a large amount of time. The magic is convenient until it breaks :)