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

Proof that Haskell sucks!

Name: Anonymous 2012-02-18 5:44

Check out the Rosetta Code page on Y Combinator.  In many languages that you would not even expect, this functional combinator is simple and straighforward.

For instance, Algol 68!

Haskell? "The obvious definition of the Y combinator in Haskell canot be used because it contains an infinite recursive type (a = a -> b). Defining a data type (Mu) allows this recursion to be broken. "

What kind of a shit functional language doesn't let you define the Y combinator using the obvious definition?

Oh right, the same one in which contortions are required to put items of different types into the same linked list.

Name: Anonymous 2012-02-18 23:13

>>10
What? Combinators are just functions.

Name: Anonymous 2012-02-19 0:03

this is stupid. Y combinator is just a fixed point combinator and haskell can have a fixed point combinator simply by fix f = f (fix f)

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