3 ms·
Haskell is the obvious alternative. It is a very elegant functional language that is, in my opinion, executed well. Does it fit into your list of languages that
by mreid 17y ago
Haskell is the obvious alternative. It is a very elegant functional language that is, in my opinion, executed well. Does it fit into your list of languages that miss the mark. If so, in what ways?
I also really like Clojure at the moment but have programmed in Haskell in the past and found there was much to recommend it. If you are genuinely looking for a good functional language you would be doing yourself a disservice if you didn't take a serious look at Haskell.
- mcav 17y agoI hadn't looked at Haskell yet, actually. It seems to slip off my radar.
- ramchip 17y agoAs much as I like Haskell and appreciate how it expands a programmer's view, it's one of the last languages I'd describe as "feeling smooth like python" ;) I think Haskell is very good for robust, complex software, but not something you can pick up quickly like Python.
- veemjeem 17y agohow is haskell the obvious choice? The parent poster talks about clojure & python -- 2 dynamically typed languages. It's going to be a world of difference moving to a statically typed one.
- mreid 17y agoThe change in typing is not really much of a jump when you realise that Haskell's type inference means you don't have to declare too many type signatures up front. A lot of type signatures in Haskell code are not technically necessary and are usual there for documentation. For example, this is perfectly valid Haskell code and doesn't mention a single type: factorial n = if n > 0 then n * factorial (n-1) else 1 The bigger conceptual shift will be from Python's mainly procedural style to Haskell's (or Clojure's) very strong emphasis on a functional style.