3 ms·

Of course you feel this way. You just finished reading SICP or maybe you binged PG essays last weekend. But eventually you'll read Simon Peyton Jones and start

Of course you feel this way. You just finished reading SICP or maybe you binged PG essays last weekend. But eventually you'll read Simon Peyton Jones and start screaming about functional programming and algebraic type systems. Then, if you're lucky, you'll get a real job and realize that languages are just a tiny part of software engineering. I'm excited for you to experience that journey.

throwaway81523 3mo ago
Wadler's old article comparing Miranda (a Haskell forebear) to Scheme might be a better place to start. https://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/dat/miranda/wadler87.pdf https://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/dat/miranda/wadler87....
- jimbokun 3mo ago
  This was a very pleasant read.
jake_and_fatman 3mo ago
I see what you did there. "Of course that's your contention. You just got finished readin' some Marxian historian -- Pete Garrison probably. You're gonna be convinced of that 'til next month when you get to James Lemon, and then you're gonna be talkin' about how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist way back in 1740. That's gonna last until next year -- you're gonna be in here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talkin' about, you know, the Pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital-forming effects of military mobilization." Good Will Hunting (1997)
mindslight 3mo ago
Do you like Apple ]['s? You've got a good point. Code generally needs to be read more than it is written. At the very least, you realize this as you try to revisit something you had done previously and are left scratching your head. Encapsulating the complexity in a custom DSL can be great for simplifying all the code you write in the DSL. But it also raises the stakes - if you ever have to revisit the DSL implementation the complexity is there lurking.

3 ms·

Of course you feel this way. You just finished reading SICP or maybe you binged PG essays last weekend. But eventually you'll read Simon Peyton Jones and start

by GMoromisato 3mo ago

throwaway81523 3mo ago
Wadler's old article comparing Miranda (a Haskell forebear) to Scheme might be a better place to start. https://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/dat/miranda/wadler87.pdf https://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/dat/miranda/wadler87....
- jimbokun 3mo ago
  This was a very pleasant read.
jake_and_fatman 3mo ago
I see what you did there. "Of course that's your contention. You just got finished readin' some Marxian historian -- Pete Garrison probably. You're gonna be convinced of that 'til next month when you get to James Lemon, and then you're gonna be talkin' about how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist way back in 1740. That's gonna last until next year -- you're gonna be in here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talkin' about, you know, the Pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital-forming effects of military mobilization." Good Will Hunting (1997)
mindslight 3mo ago
Do you like Apple ]['s? You've got a good point. Code generally needs to be read more than it is written. At the very least, you realize this as you try to revisit something you had done previously and are left scratching your head. Encapsulating the complexity in a custom DSL can be great for simplifying all the code you write in the DSL. But it also raises the stakes - if you ever have to revisit the DSL implementation the complexity is there lurking.