jroesch

15 ms·

91.
by jroesch 13y ago
This is known as F-bounded polymorphism if you are interested in knowing more about this approach.
92.
by jroesch 13y ago
Not really I've had Java developers look me in the face and say that the nonsense names (very much like the one above) that Spring uses are somehow more readable than simple operators or abstract names. Monoid is NOT a detached term
93.
by jroesch 13y ago
If you don't know what a Monoid is you are probably a pretty poor mathematician as it is core structure to do even undergraduate abstract algebra. Many computer scientists already understand reasoning about abstract structures and use
94.
by jroesch 13y ago
Though many of us are computer scientists (at least by education), and engineers. Vocabulary does not just manifest out of thin air. Where do you think the words function, or algorithm came from? I can tell you they were in use before 1950.
95.
by jroesch 13y ago
Have you interacted with the Haskell community? The Haskell community is made up of individuals who come to Haskell from a variety of different backgrounds. Yes there are a lot of Computer Scientists using Haskell, but not all of us are pro
96.
by jroesch 13y ago
I think it is a little disingenuous to say that algorithms get buried in academic literature and are impossible to find. By the nature of research most of these things are made public when published, often times there is no implementation
97.
by jroesch 13y ago
JavaScript goes from a mediocre language to nearly unusable without closures.
98.
by jroesch 13y ago
It is done statically . Types are a compile time construct, languages like Agda and Coq have no type information at runtime. This means if one can't statically prove that their types are correct the code won't compile. For exampl
99.
by jroesch 13y ago
The worst thing to do when learning Haskell is to think that you will be comfortable in just a week. Learning Haskell for most is like relearning to program. It takes time to build up intuition and understanding of the language. I know that
100.
by jroesch 13y ago
I misread your comment, usually people challenge that point. I totally agree that it is difficult to talk about maintainability in an objective fashion, but there is something to be said about having as many of your assumptions in your code
101.
by jroesch 13y ago
It is not a "strong" statement to say that some Haskell code is backed by proofs. There is Wadler's Theorems for free![1] which allows one to reason about pure function's behavior purely from type signatures. As well G
102.
by jroesch 13y ago
Same I had been working on a Scala one, but had slowed down as I couldn't keep up with the Rethink team's releases.
103.
by jroesch 13y ago
I've also been working on a Scala Driver in stealth mode, I've been able to successfully send a subset of queries. Though my primary focus has been on making sure queries are typed correctly in Scala. As well as concurrently engi
104.
by jroesch 13y ago
I don't buy that this will make people want to Google+. You can't change the fact that there just aren't enough people on it. Outside the tech community I literally I don't know a single individual who uses it.
105.
Go is not great.(imgur.com)
1 points by jroesch 14y ago|0 comments
106.
by jroesch 14y ago
You can do: "Hello".method(:split).to_proc.curry[""] => ['H', 'e', 'l', 'l', 'o'] If you want to even make the receiver an argument it would take a little more hoop jumping, but with a tiny monkey patch you can enable some
107.
by jroesch 14y ago
I am an undergraduate at UCSB and I have had a much different experience. For both my friends and I getting involved with research has been relatively easy, it just requires making the effort of interacting with the faculty outside of class
108.
by jroesch 14y ago
The author again falls into the strong vs. weak, and static vs. dynamic trap without a solid understanding of the terminology. As per usual the widespread misuse of the terms has made them useless. It is worth reading from a more rigorous
109.
by jroesch 14y ago
Many people conflate the features of a statically typed languages with those of a language without a runtime. Many of these features(dynamic loading, REPL, ect) are obtainable in a language that is statically typed but provides a runtime,
110.
by jroesch 14y ago
To me it seems that the point on serialization is completely moot in languages like Haskell(what we are talking about), serialization may be hard(er) to do in a language like Java or C++ where we have a rooted type hierarchy and we can't ea
111.
by jroesch 14y ago
It only "sucks"(causes problems rarely, and can be quite useful regardless) in dynamic languages. Languages like Go, Rust, and Haskell provide the same flexibility with static guarantees. All you must do is define type specific implementati
112.
by jroesch 15y ago
I was once one of the people who was incorrectly told, and therefore believed simple tasks like IO in Haskell was hard. Though it couldn't be further from the truth. main = do handle <- openFile "filename.txt" ReadMode