2024/10/06

Newest at the top

2024-10-06 18:51:59 +0200 <Inst> there's folks on discourse who are fundamentalist in "fake python" style
2024-10-06 18:51:15 +0200 <davean> I find I do both, depending on the details
2024-10-06 18:50:20 +0200 <Inst> there's a trade-off in expressivity for familiarity, there's tons of cases where using >>= directly can be more expressive
2024-10-06 18:49:54 +0200 <Inst> if you're not reusing the term, why bother with do; bar <- foo; baz bar when you can just foo >>= baz and be done with it?
2024-10-06 18:49:02 +0200 <Inst> monochrom: the reason I worry about >>= leaking when it's explicitly used is because I love >>=
2024-10-06 18:48:45 +0200 <Inst> thanks tomsmeding, and thanks for being unerringly helpful and a strong contributor to the community
2024-10-06 18:48:42 +0200 <davean> There *are* ways to deal with it, but you have to deal with a lot of things you don't in others.
2024-10-06 18:48:26 +0200 <davean> Franciman: Honestly though, this is a problem I think Haskell makes legitimately harder than other languages do though.
2024-10-06 18:47:01 +0200 <davean> That has limited pause time though
2024-10-06 18:46:15 +0200 <davean> This predates the non-moving GC
2024-10-06 18:46:00 +0200vanishingideal(~vanishing@user/vanishingideal) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2024-10-06 18:45:39 +0200 <Franciman> ty
2024-10-06 18:45:29 +0200 <Franciman> cool
2024-10-06 18:44:43 +0200 <geekosaur> IIRC House specifically did sound drivers in Haskell
2024-10-06 18:43:41 +0200 <davean> Franciman: https://metasepi.org/en/posts/2014-09-04-haskell-symposium.html sound drivers are soft realtime. (I remembered this existed, I don't remember the contense at all)
2024-10-06 18:43:14 +0200raehik(~raehik@rdng-25-b2-v4wan-169990-cust1344.vm39.cable.virginm.net) raehik
2024-10-06 18:42:59 +0200tromp(~textual@92-110-219-57.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl)
2024-10-06 18:42:41 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2024-10-06 18:39:47 +0200 <Rembane> davean: That's true.
2024-10-06 18:39:32 +0200 <davean> hard sometihng is
2024-10-06 18:39:29 +0200 <davean> Rembane: I mean ... its always the product of the two that sets how rthi
2024-10-06 18:38:56 +0200 <Rembane> davean: Way harder because of Haskell or because of the domain?
2024-10-06 18:38:36 +0200 <davean> There have been a few OS projects in Haskell, while they've managed, I tihnk they've all ended with "This is way harder than we like"
2024-10-06 18:38:02 +0200rvalue(~rvalue@user/rvalue) rvalue
2024-10-06 18:37:47 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn
2024-10-06 18:37:35 +0200 <Franciman> nice
2024-10-06 18:37:10 +0200 <davean> I wouldn't call it great at it thoguh.
2024-10-06 18:36:15 +0200 <davean> Franciman: Sure. Particularly tight realtime its not great at. Soft is pretty easy with the realtime GC though.
2024-10-06 18:35:40 +0200 <Franciman> can haskell do real time programming?
2024-10-06 18:35:22 +0200 <Franciman> i'm not sure it's easy to change the status quo of a GCed lang like haskell
2024-10-06 18:34:53 +0200rvalue(~rvalue@user/rvalue) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2024-10-06 18:32:49 +0200 <Franciman> the status quo of physics laws is impossible to change
2024-10-06 18:32:33 +0200 <Franciman> the status quo of a society is very difficult to change, because of what you said
2024-10-06 18:32:03 +0200 <Franciman> monochrom: the status quo of what?
2024-10-06 18:31:00 +0200 <Rembane> That's how brains work to use very little glucose
2024-10-06 18:30:34 +0200 <monochrom> But people wouldn't like that, eh? People are more comfortable with camps, paradigms, stereotypes, stigmas, over-simplifications.
2024-10-06 18:30:18 +0200JuanDaugherty(~juan@user/JuanDaugherty) (Quit: JuanDaugherty)
2024-10-06 18:28:49 +0200 <monochrom> It's why I don't put any weight on that notion unless in the context of "we need to get it done yesterday".
2024-10-06 18:27:26 +0200 <monochrom> More seriously, the status quo is always changeable. Nothing blocks adding a task X library to any ecosystem.
2024-10-06 18:27:00 +0200michalz(~michalz@185.246.207.200)
2024-10-06 18:26:38 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2024-10-06 18:25:47 +0200 <monochrom> Hot take: "good at task X" is a social construct. >:)
2024-10-06 18:25:36 +0200vanishingideal(~vanishing@user/vanishingideal) vanishingideal
2024-10-06 18:24:36 +0200vanishingideal(~vanishing@user/vanishingideal) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2024-10-06 18:24:02 +0200mud(~mud@user/kadoban) kadoban
2024-10-06 18:23:59 +0200 <dminuoso> The ecosystem does add to the usefulness of a language.
2024-10-06 18:23:46 +0200 <dminuoso> monochrom: On the other hand, from a management perspective when asked "what language should we use", I'm not sure whether differentiating between language and ecosyste, is relevant.
2024-10-06 18:23:17 +0200ljdarj(~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2024-10-06 18:22:41 +0200 <JuanDaugherty> all instances of which are ammenable to substition with an appropriate np, "speced lang", "lang as delivered", etc
2024-10-06 18:22:23 +0200merijn(~merijn@204-220-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn