8 ms·
I wrote a simple OCaml compiler for a class in college. I particularly enjoyed using different operators for floating-point and integer math — brilliant usabili
by gcv 13y ago
I wrote a simple OCaml compiler for a class in college. I particularly enjoyed using different operators for floating-point and integer math — brilliant usability there, really sold me on static types. Haskell does better with its type classes, except my four attempts to understand monads and arrows have, so far, met with rather mixed success.
Static typing has its place in some people's hearts, and I respect that, but saying that dynamic typing has been outdated since the 80s is (1) trolling, and (2) happens to also just be, like, your opinion, man.
- eru 13y agoIf you want to have another go at it, I recommend Learn you a Haskell for Great Good (available online for free at http://learnyouahaskell.com/ http://learnyouahaskell.com/) for your Haskell learning needs. Don't stress the Monads and Arrows so much. I know what arrows do, but can't spot their applications in practice. And still I get paid for writing Haskell programmes. Oh, and please excuse my snarky tone. Your ancestor comment seemed to ask for it. Yes, they are, even now, languages around that are even worse. But better ways have been around for ages. A similar example is garbage collection: It, too, has been around since basically the dawn of programming languages, but only made serious inroads into the mainstream in the last decades.
- qu4z-2 13y agoHonestly, Python 2.x's dynamic typing doesn't make the experience of floating-point/integer maths much better. The value of 3 / x changing depending on whether I pass 2 or 2.0 is the trade-off of the Python approach, and I honestly don't know which I prefer.