Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

Why is Haskell so shitty?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 7:48

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 7:49

Actual users:
Haskell  | C
3        | 12249828

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 7:53

>>1 y u so shitty troll?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 7:56

>>3

troll'd hard >:]

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 9:01

Ugly:
Haskell | C
Yes     | Passably

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 9:23

Memory safety:

Haskell | C
Yes     | $> Segmentation fault

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 10:09

Both languages have their uses.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 10:10

>>1
C is not bloated. Glibc is.

Try programming without an standard library, ``faggot'' and then talk.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 10:18

No.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 10:23

Is it shit?
Haskell | C    | Everything else |
Yes.      Yes.   Yes.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 11:12

At least troll OP understands Currying.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 11:17

>>6
But segmentation faults are a safety measure!
Do you want your programs to silently fail?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 11:31

>>8
Try compiling without a compiler. How about you stop bullshitting?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 11:40

>>13
I just said that IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 11:47

Wow, I made this a long time ago. Thanks for posting it.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 12:38

>>11
I actually suspect not.

Name: >>15 2011-09-06 13:31

>>16
And why is that? A function of type a -> b -> c is actually a -> (b -> c), taking one argument of type a.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 15:36

Wait a minute, you can only have one argument?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 21:28

>>18
Looks like there are three or four arguments going on here.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 21:35

>>18
f :: a -> b -> c being parsed as f :: a -> (b -> c) means that every function can be viewed as taking only one argument.

f x y is formally considered to apply the function f to x, returning a function of type (b -> c), which is then applied to y, resulting in a value of type c.

In practice, this is all optimized away by the compiler, but it still lets you pass the function (f x) around without directly messing with lambdas.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 21:57

>>19
VIP quality

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-06 22:04

>>8
u blind?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-07 3:20

>>22
He's tolled.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List