3 ms·
I really wish this was strict. I feel like most regular programmers could understand and benefit from using ML (or some similar language). In Haskell, lazines
by adultSwim 13y ago
I really wish this was strict.
I feel like most regular programmers could understand and benefit from using ML (or some similar language).
In Haskell, laziness kept the language pure while it was developing but now I'm not sure it should be the default. I like OCaml style opt in laziness.
For most people, they could get a lot of pretty vanilla typed functional programming language. Polymorphic type inference, algebraic data-types, pattern matching. That gets you really far.
- cannam 13y agoThere is Yeti (http://mth.github.io/yeti/ http://mth.github.io/yeti/), a JVM language from the ML family. I think it's close to a 1.0 release, and the compiler has been pretty reliable for a while now. I find it a delight to use.