3 ms·

> Both Haskell and OCaml have kinda barebones standard libraries. […] Haskell doesn’t include Map and HashMap; The Haskell standard library was split off into

by kccqzy 2y ago

> Both Haskell and OCaml have kinda barebones standard libraries. […] Haskell doesn’t include Map and HashMap; The Haskell standard library was split off into smaller parts. Map used to be part of the standard library. To date the containers package (which contains Map) is still pre-installed alongside the GHC compiler. So it should be considered part of the standard library. Check out the documentation for GHC 3.02 https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/3.02/docs/users_guide/users_guide-5.html#ss5.6 https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/3.02/docs/users_guide/use... it clearly shows a FiniteMap type being provided.

ggm 2y ago
I have some sympathy for "divide and conquer" but for me, libc and libm and libffi seem like very good splits. libgnuc is just having a lend, libobjc is beginning to feel like I'm being trolled and when I learned about stdlib I decided to stop worrying. There was a time when the fastest way to resolve circular dependencies in the library chain was to simply add -Lthing multiple times in sequence so that a subsequent library could be sure the name list of the priors were loaded, including the dependencies down "right" of it in the list. Taking something as fundamental to what FP is like map/reduce and saying "this can live in an adjunct library" feels like somebody took divide and conquer a litte too far.
- eru 2y ago
  > Taking something as fundamental to what FP is like map/reduce and saying "this can live in an adjunct library" feels like somebody took divide and conquer a litte too far. What are you talking about?
  - ggm 2y ago
    > The Haskell standard library was split off into smaller parts. Map used to be part of the standard library. To date the containers package (which contains Map) is still pre-installed alongside the GHC compiler. So it should be considered part of the standard library. See those words "to date" and "considered" Not Is, is considered, to date. Thats what I am talking about.
    - eru 2y ago
      Sure. But what does Map have to do with map and reduce?
      - eru 2y ago
        To be less snarky: this might be a bit confusing to non-Haskellers. The Map they are talking about here is a key-value-store datatype. It has nothing to do with the 'map' function.
- remexre 2y ago
  This is Map as in Data.Map.Map, not as in Data.Functor.fmap.

by kccqzy 2y ago

ggm 2y ago

I have some sympathy for "divide and conquer" but for me, libc and libm and libffi seem like very good splits. libgnuc is just having a lend, libobjc is beginning to feel like I'm being trolled and when I learned about stdlib I decided to stop worrying. There was a time when the fastest way to resolve circular dependencies in the library chain was to simply add -Lthing multiple times in sequence so that a subsequent library could be sure the name list of the priors were loaded, including the dependencies down "right" of it in the list. Taking something as fundamental to what FP is like map/reduce and saying "this can live in an adjunct library" feels like somebody took divide and conquer a litte too far.

eru 2y ago
> Taking something as fundamental to what FP is like map/reduce and saying "this can live in an adjunct library" feels like somebody took divide and conquer a litte too far. What are you talking about?
- ggm 2y ago
  > The Haskell standard library was split off into smaller parts. Map used to be part of the standard library. To date the containers package (which contains Map) is still pre-installed alongside the GHC compiler. So it should be considered part of the standard library. See those words "to date" and "considered" Not Is, is considered, to date. Thats what I am talking about.
  - eru 2y ago
    Sure. But what does Map have to do with map and reduce?
    - eru 2y ago
      To be less snarky: this might be a bit confusing to non-Haskellers. The Map they are talking about here is a key-value-store datatype. It has nothing to do with the 'map' function.
remexre 2y ago
This is Map as in Data.Map.Map, not as in Data.Functor.fmap.