Re: [Haskell-cafe] Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving `return` out of `Monad`

newer
status and future of haskell98 and...

older
Re: [Haskell-cafe] MRP,...

Brandon Allbery

7 Oct 2015 7 Oct '15

7:05 p.m.

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Bardur Arantsson wrote:

...

Please consider that the the way practical development really happens[2]

...among web developers, who of course are the only real developers? Have you considered that there are developers who are not web developers? The past day has convinced me that the web devs have relegated everyone else to fake-non-programmer status and actively want them out of the community because fake programmers don't benefit you real programmers. I had heard that the financial users generally refused to have anything to do with the Haskell community. Now I know why. I wonder how many of them, if any indeed are left after past breaking changes, are in the process of switching to OCaml. I'm sure you consider that a good thing, because they're obviously just holding back "real programmers". -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net

Attachments:

attachment.html (text/html — 2.0 KB)

Show replies by date

Bardur Arantsson

7 Oct 7 Oct

7:38 p.m.

New subject: Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving `return` out of `Monad`

On 10/08/2015 01:05 AM, Brandon Allbery wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Bardur Arantsson wrote:

...
Please consider that the the way practical development really happens[2]

....among web developers, who of course are the only real developers?

Nononono, I only provided that as an example. I'm well aware that there are whole other ecosystems. (I, for example, am currently doing full-stack.)

...

Have you considered that there are developers who are not web developers? The past day has convinced me that the web devs have relegated everyone else to fake-non-programmer status and actively want them out of the community because fake programmers don't benefit you real programmers.

Re-read your own words. You're doing exactly the same, just in reverse.

...

I had heard that the financial users generally refused to have anything to do with the Haskell community. Now I know why.

I think Standard Charatered might disagree, but... whatevs.

...

I wonder how many of them, if any indeed are left after past breaking changes, are in the process of switching to OCaml. I'm sure you consider that a good thing, because they're obviously just holding back "real programmers".

O'calm down! :) The world isn't going to end over this. (And... if you still think it is: Provide quantifiable data: Tell us how many of *your* MLoC will be affected. Tell us... whatever you can without violating NDAs, etc. "We" *will* apprectiate and take this into account.) Regards,

Mike Meyer

7:39 p.m.

New subject: Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving `return` out of `Monad`

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 6:05 PM Brandon Allbery wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Bardur Arantsson wrote:

...
Please consider that the the way practical development really happens[2]

...among web developers, who of course are the only real developers? [...] I had heard that the financial users generally refused to have anything to do with the Haskell community. Now I know why.

I'm curious - do "practical" developers really feel like they have to rush out and update their tool chain whenever a new version of part of it comes out? Most of the projects I've worked on considered the language version as a fixed part of the technology stack, and almost never updated it. Even when using Python, which valued not breaking working code more than it's own zen. But changing anything that potentially affected all the code in a working project was pretty much never done, and always involved a lot of effort. So the worst headache I got from language evolution was from trying to remember which set of features I had available for each project. No, that's second - the biggest one was from arguments about when we should adopt a new version. But breaking working code pretty much didn't happen.

Richard A. O'Keefe

8 Oct 8 Oct

1:04 a.m.

New subject: Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving `return` out of `Monad`

On 8/10/2015, at 12:39 pm, Mike Meyer wrote:

...

I'm curious - do "practical" developers really feel like they have to rush out and update their tool chain whenever a new version of part of it comes out? Most of the projects I've worked on considered the language version as a fixed part of the technology stack, and almost never updated it. Even when using Python, which valued not breaking working code more than it's own zen. But changing anything that potentially affected all the code in a working project was pretty much never done, and always involved a lot of effort.

My computer spends more of its time installing new versions of Java 1.8 than it does running Java. An application I found very useful stopped working when Java 1.6 went away, but Java 1.6 had to go away because of (in)security concerns. How anyone managed to write a program in Java 1.6 that would not run in 1.8 I hope never to know. (No, rebuilding from sources didn't work either. Tried that.)

Tony Morris

1:25 a.m.

New subject: Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving `return` out of `Monad`

Java is not backward compatible, even between minor release. On 08/10/15 15:04, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:

...

On 8/10/2015, at 12:39 pm, Mike Meyer wrote:

...
I'm curious - do "practical" developers really feel like they have to rush out and update their tool chain whenever a new version of part of it comes out? Most of the projects I've worked on considered the language version as a fixed part of the technology stack, and almost never updated it. Even when using Python, which valued not breaking working code more than it's own zen. But changing anything that potentially affected all the code in a working project was pretty much never done, and always involved a lot of effort.

My computer spends more of its time installing new versions of Java 1.8 than it does running Java. An application I found very useful stopped working when Java 1.6 went away, but Java 1.6 had to go away because of (in)security concerns. How anyone managed to write a program in Java 1.6 that would not run in 1.8 I hope never to know.

(No, rebuilding from sources didn't work either. Tried that.)

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Kosyrev Serge

5:39 a.m.

New subject: Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving `return` out of `Monad`

Tony Morris writes:

...

Java is not backward compatible, even between minor release.

Is there an understanding of how they manage to qualify as an industrially-acceptable language in spite of this? -- с уважениeм / respectfully, Косырев Серёга

Tony Morris

5:41 a.m.

New subject: Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving `return` out of `Monad`

Successful marketing. On 08/10/15 19:39, Kosyrev Serge wrote:

...

Tony Morris writes:

...
Java is not backward compatible, even between minor release.

Is there an understanding of how they manage to qualify as an industrially-acceptable language in spite of this?

3517

Age (days ago)

3518

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

6 comments

6 participants

participants (6)

Bardur Arantsson
Brandon Allbery
Kosyrev Serge
Mike Meyer
Richard A. O'Keefe
Tony Morris