Comments for ~~ http://jartur.l-square.net Blog -> Maybe Blog Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:08:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 Comment on Is Haskell really that… great as a programming language? by cx http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/05/is-haskell-really-that-great-as-a-programming-language/#comment-53 cx Fri, 18 Jul 2008 05:54:25 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=7#comment-53 @jartur, you are absolutely right. No doubt. Actually I was talking about different kinds of tools. (I have some problems with writing down my thoughts precisely. Alas. Err, sorry. I feel stupid. Please be patient with meI wish I was an author but my brain works in a some different way. And damn I love this way.) And another point about Haskell. You are facing with a lot of problems during initial studying. And you should better use this situation for your (well, not only your) profit. Try do at least two things: 1. Write all problems down. Maybe later you or somebody else will provide a verbose solution/recommendation/etc 2. Suggest some improvements (libs/syntax/whatever). As in #1 maybe you or someone else could take it into account and make some changes. Doing this you will definitely provide a help to Haskell newbie (yeah I know about the great mess of Monad tutors) and later it will be really interesting to collect elegant solutions for these 'issues'. (imho) @jartur, you are absolutely right. No doubt.
Actually I was talking about different kinds of tools.
(I have some problems with writing down my thoughts precisely. Alas. Err, sorry. I feel stupid. Please be patient with meI wish I was an author but my brain works in a some different way. And damn I love this way.)

And another point about Haskell. You are facing with a lot of problems during initial studying. And you should better use this situation for your (well, not only your) profit. Try do at least two things:
1. Write all problems down. Maybe later you or somebody else will provide a verbose solution/recommendation/etc
2. Suggest some improvements (libs/syntax/whatever). As in #1 maybe you or someone else could take it into account and make some changes.
Doing this you will definitely provide a help to Haskell newbie (yeah I know about the great mess of Monad tutors) and later it will be really interesting to collect elegant solutions for these ‘issues’.
(imho)

]]> Comment on Is Haskell really that… great as a programming language? by jartur http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/05/is-haskell-really-that-great-as-a-programming-language/#comment-52 jartur Fri, 18 Jul 2008 05:15:41 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=7#comment-52 cx, actually you can compare tools. You can compare different models of screwdrivers, or, say, mice & keyboards. The question here is whether your analogy is correct or not. Are different PLs are different models of keyboards or they are more like a scalpel & a hammer? I don't know. Actually, this doesn't even matter. And in general I agree with you & never had said that I don't, I think. All in all I think that this discussion is somewhat retarded, like most of abstract PL discussion out there. It has no point. cx, actually you can compare tools.
You can compare different models of screwdrivers, or, say, mice & keyboards. The question here is whether your analogy is correct or not. Are different PLs are different models of keyboards or they are more like a scalpel & a hammer? I don’t know.
Actually, this doesn’t even matter. And in general I agree with you & never had said that I don’t, I think.
All in all I think that this discussion is somewhat retarded, like most of abstract PL discussion out there. It has no point.

]]> Comment on Is Haskell really that… great as a programming language? by cx http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/05/is-haskell-really-that-great-as-a-programming-language/#comment-51 cx Fri, 18 Jul 2008 05:04:04 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=7#comment-51 I don't belive in bad and good languages. I will never say that either 'Haskell is a good programming language' or 'the cost of writing *usefull* application in Haskell is high'. This is completely wrong. First, comparing tools is incorrect. Try to compare a syringe and a scalpel. What tool should I use for a generic medicine operations? (hello jartur and yours usefull applications). Second, each tool was designed with a few things in mind. You can use hammer instead of screwdriver. This is your choice. Nobody will blame you for it (at least I wouldn't). But ofcourse some things will become more difficult... It is hardly ever possible to make 'The Great Univiersal Tool For Life and Everthing'. So why are you saying that the price for writing 'useful Haskell application' is too high? What the hell is useful application? When I need to play with some math model I chose Haskell. When I need to play with some console utils I choose 'bash/sh'. When I need to deal with some generic 'high level' things in imperative manner I choose python. When I need some more 'low level' control I'll write an extension/module for python in C. That's it. I guess you are either using a wrong tool (haskell) for some specific 'useful appication' or you didn't get the 'Haskell way'... I don’t belive in bad and good languages. I will never say that either ‘Haskell is a good programming language’ or ‘the cost of writing *usefull* application in Haskell is high’. This is completely wrong.
First, comparing tools is incorrect. Try to compare a syringe and a scalpel. What tool should I use for a generic medicine operations? (hello jartur and yours usefull applications).
Second, each tool was designed with a few things in mind.
You can use hammer instead of screwdriver. This is your choice. Nobody will blame you for it (at least I wouldn’t). But ofcourse some things will become more difficult… It is hardly ever possible to make ‘The Great Univiersal Tool For Life and Everthing’.
So why are you saying that the price for writing ‘useful Haskell application’ is too high? What the hell is useful application?
When I need to play with some math model I chose Haskell. When I need to play with some console utils I choose ‘bash/sh’. When I need to deal with some generic ‘high level’ things in imperative manner I choose python. When I need some more ‘low level’ control I’ll write an extension/module for python in C. That’s it.
I guess you are either using a wrong tool (haskell) for some specific ‘useful appication’ or you didn’t get the ‘Haskell way’…

]]> Comment on LHC activation soon! by jartur http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/06/lhc-activation-soon/#comment-49 jartur Sun, 13 Jul 2008 02:53:17 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=18#comment-49 $$! arcos(\frac{v_x c_x + v_y c_y}{\sqrt{{v_x}^2+{v_y}^2}\sqrt{{c_x}^2 + {c_y}^2}}) $$
arcos(\frac{v_x c_x + v_y c_y}{\sqrt{{v_x}^2+{v_y}^2}\sqrt{{c_x}^2 + {c_y}^2}})

]]> Comment on LHC activation soon! by god http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/06/lhc-activation-soon/#comment-42 god Tue, 24 Jun 2008 04:01:55 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=18#comment-42 not yet fag not yet fag

]]> Comment on Is Haskell really that… great as a programming language? by Frank Thomsen http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/05/is-haskell-really-that-great-as-a-programming-language/#comment-41 Frank Thomsen Mon, 23 Jun 2008 11:49:14 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=7#comment-41 Haskell is a fine language when you want to give functional programming a go. But as soon as you want to write anything useful it just doesn't cut it; it is too esoteric. If you want to try out functional programming, consider using Erlang, F# or OCaml instead. Haskell is a fine language when you want to give functional programming a go. But as soon as you want to write anything useful it just doesn’t cut it; it is too esoteric.
If you want to try out functional programming, consider using Erlang, F# or OCaml instead.

]]> Comment on PLT Scheme 4.0 is out! by jartur http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/06/plt-scheme-40-is-out/#comment-39 jartur Wed, 18 Jun 2008 01:38:33 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=16#comment-39 Oh, I'll try that. Thanks. Oh, I’ll try that.
Thanks.

]]> Comment on PLT Scheme 4.0 is out! by Sam TH http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/06/plt-scheme-40-is-out/#comment-38 Sam TH Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:31:13 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=16#comment-38 Here's an example of how to deconstruct such a value: `<code>(let* ([l (list 1 2 3 4)]<br /> [v (find 3 l)])<br /> (if (Just? v)<br /> (Just-v v)<br /> (error __abENT__apos;not-found)))</code>` Thanks for trying Typed Scheme! Here’s an example of how to deconstruct such a value:

(let* ([l (list 1 2 3 4)]
        [v (find 3 l)])
    (if (Just? v)
        (Just-v v)
        (error 'not-found)))

Thanks for trying Typed Scheme!

]]> Comment on Is Haskell really that… great as a programming language? by jartur http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/05/is-haskell-really-that-great-as-a-programming-language/#comment-36 jartur Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:23:52 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=7#comment-36 Norman, the most successful apps in Haskell I believe are Darcs & XMonad. Everything else is mostly CS exercises or mathematical explorations. This is why I said that there is no evidence to prove that Haskell is actually suitable for general programming. Norman, the most successful apps in Haskell I believe are Darcs & XMonad.
Everything else is mostly CS exercises or mathematical explorations.

This is why I said that there is no evidence to prove that Haskell is actually suitable for general programming.

]]> Comment on Is Haskell really that… great as a programming language? by Norman http://jartur.l-square.net/2008/05/is-haskell-really-that-great-as-a-programming-language/#comment-35 Norman Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:16:07 +0000 http://jartur.l-square.net/?p=7#comment-35 Haskell : where are the apps ? Besides compilers and other such programs written by gurus that would write great programs in assembly if they had to anyway... Are there examples of non trivial GUI programs ? I've only seen slow toys that weigh several MBs. Haskell : where are the apps ? Besides compilers and other such programs written by gurus that would write great programs in assembly if they had to anyway…

Are there examples of non trivial GUI programs ? I’ve only seen slow toys that weigh several MBs.

]]>