4 ms·

As long as people don't abuse that power and don't write C++ code, full of statefull functors (intellegent fools they are, the worst kind), I'm happy.

beagle3 14y ago
This. A lot of Haskell's power comes from it being able to enforce the validity of this style of programming. C++ does not - and when working with C++, you have to reason at both the C++ level like you always do, and at the Haskell level (but without the compiler verifying your work). That's extra burden without extra benefits.
- dchichkov 14y ago
  It is just that author in the "Container Operations" says that using functors in C++ is such a good practice. No. While concept is nice, in practice, with C++ it can result in time waste and unreadable/unmodifiable code with no clear benefits. Cleaning up some statefull functors overdesigned by some intellegent fool can be a gruesome job.
  - laureny 14y ago
    > Cleaning up some statefull functors This makes no sense at all. A functor is a type class, it doesn't contain any state.
    - wonderzombie 14y ago
      In Haskell, it makes no sense, agreed. In C++, it makes sense: http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/functors.html http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/functors.html. Functors are function objects, which is to say they're a class/struct with one method, operator(). If this makes you sigh, know that you're not alone.
laureny 14y ago
> full of statefull functors (intellegent fools they are, the worst kind), I'm happy. If you are going to be judgmental and calling people fools, I suggest improving your spelling first, or you'll just appear to be one yourself.
- dchichkov 14y ago
  Yes, I think you are right. My language was not precise enough. I wanted to describe a coder with little experience; tendency to overdesign; tendency to use 'design patterns' with no reason; tendency to build very elaborate designs; tendency to use the same pattern everywhere. I think that "intelligent fool" and maybe "baby with a hammer" fit that description. As to spelling errors, I'd suggest to try ignoring these and try to get the gist instead. Quite a few people here (including me) are not native English speakers.
tikhonj 14y ago
"Functor" in Haskell has a very different meaning from "functor" in C++. In Haskell, a functor (loosely speaking) is any type you can map a function over--lists, trees, options, functions... If you squint, they're similar (but simpler and more general) to types that can be iterated over.

beagle3 14y ago

This. A lot of Haskell's power comes from it being able to enforce the validity of this style of programming. C++ does not - and when working with C++, you have to reason at both the C++ level like you always do, and at the Haskell level (but without the compiler verifying your work). That's extra burden without extra benefits.

dchichkov 14y ago
It is just that author in the "Container Operations" says that using functors in C++ is such a good practice. No. While concept is nice, in practice, with C++ it can result in time waste and unreadable/unmodifiable code with no clear benefits. Cleaning up some statefull functors overdesigned by some intellegent fool can be a gruesome job.
- laureny 14y ago
  > Cleaning up some statefull functors This makes no sense at all. A functor is a type class, it doesn't contain any state.
  - wonderzombie 14y ago
    In Haskell, it makes no sense, agreed. In C++, it makes sense: http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/functors.html http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/functors.html. Functors are function objects, which is to say they're a class/struct with one method, operator(). If this makes you sigh, know that you're not alone.

laureny 14y ago

> full of statefull functors (intellegent fools they are, the worst kind), I'm happy. If you are going to be judgmental and calling people fools, I suggest improving your spelling first, or you'll just appear to be one yourself.

dchichkov 14y ago
Yes, I think you are right. My language was not precise enough. I wanted to describe a coder with little experience; tendency to overdesign; tendency to use 'design patterns' with no reason; tendency to build very elaborate designs; tendency to use the same pattern everywhere. I think that "intelligent fool" and maybe "baby with a hammer" fit that description. As to spelling errors, I'd suggest to try ignoring these and try to get the gist instead. Quite a few people here (including me) are not native English speakers.

tikhonj 14y ago

"Functor" in Haskell has a very different meaning from "functor" in C++. In Haskell, a functor (loosely speaking) is any type you can map a function over--lists, trees, options, functions... If you squint, they're similar (but simpler and more general) to types that can be iterated over.