167 reputation
4
bio website
location
age
visits member for 3 years, 9 months
seen Jun 25 at 15:06

Jan
15
comment Haskell Using Source File Problems
Something like notepad++ would work. [ notepad-plus-plus.org ]
Nov
15
comment Introducing Programming To a Mathematician
I'm a math major, and I can recommend Haskell as awesome from a math perspective. I also like reading some of the theoretical stuff that goes with it, much more than most languages.
Nov
15
comment Is Haskell's type system an obstacle to understanding functional programming?
Well, some parts are messy, I agree. I really think that the numeric stuff in the prelude could stand to be cleaned up and fixed, because as it stands, it's a terrible mess. But most of the key functional aspects are pretty clean. map, filter, foldr/l, and other fun functional functions work quite nicely.
Nov
15
awarded  Editor
Nov
15
revised Is Haskell's type system an obstacle to understanding functional programming?
Added more words
Jul
20
comment Refactoring into lots of methods - is this considered clean or not?
I might add that different languages can have have functions with different sizes before they become unmanageable. 7 lines long is a biggish Haskell function, while it's tiny for ASM.
Jul
5
awarded  Commentator
Jul
5
comment Learning Haskell and C# Simultaneously
Indeed, I do recommend Haskell over F# for learning and using, but as this was a question with C# and functional programming and I figured that F# was something that should be mentioned, just so that you were aware of it. LYAH is a great book, and I personally think you should learn Haskell first, since that's exactly what I'm doing now. (Just starting to get my feet wet with C# after learning Haskell)
Jul
5
comment Learning Haskell and C# Simultaneously
Might I mention F#? It is like Haskell (more so than C# at least) and you can use it and C# in the same project. I still think that learning Haskell is great, and you should learn it before F#.
Jan
10
comment What do you wish language designers paid attention to?
@Lennart That's a good thing.
Jan
9
comment What do you wish language designers paid attention to?
@Lennart: I would say that being able (but not required, see rule 4) to explicitly state function's types is a good thing. It is similar to design by contract. That is the point I want to make.
Jan
8
comment What do you wish language designers paid attention to?
@Lennart: Most of the time, when writing non trivial functions, I write out the type signature. This also helps when reading the code. Knowing that foo :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> a, I know that foo is going to pick an element out of a list based on a function passed in. bar:: a -> b -> a has only one implementation, it must be const. I don't see anything of the sort when reading python code.
Jan
7
comment What do you wish language designers paid attention to?
Orthogonal means each feature does something different. Look at tools like grep or awk. They do one thing, well. You then hook them up in different orders to do anything you need.
Jan
7
comment What do you wish language designers paid attention to?
I think Mata-Lua or Template Haskell do an good job for providing this. (Not as nice as Scheme macro's, but that's what you pay for using more then parens in a language)
Jan
7
comment What do you wish language designers paid attention to?
"Explicit is better than implicit" I agree; compare Haskell's Type system to Python's. Much more explicit, and in my opinion, much better.
Dec
22
comment Is Haskell's type system an obstacle to understanding functional programming?
Not ignore so much as ignore it as much as type out the function, load it in GHCi, and go :t on it. But you are still going to need to sprinkle in some fromIntegral or other functions in sometimes.
Dec
22
answered Is Haskell's type system an obstacle to understanding functional programming?
Dec
17
comment Should I focus on being deep or broad
F# would integrate well with C# or other .net stuff you are working on. Just something to keep in mind. Clojure works well with Java.
Dec
17
awarded  Teacher
Dec
17
answered Should I focus on being deep or broad