Newest at the top
| 2025-01-11 23:07:54 +0100 | <geekosaur> | it is very much a pattern in functional languages, and a very important one |
| 2025-01-11 23:07:39 +0100 | <geekosaur> | I mean, `map`, pretty much everything in Foldable and Traversable, `interact` (which used to be the first thing you did in ghci), lots of things in Haskell use HOFs |
| 2025-01-11 23:06:39 +0100 | <geekosaur> | it's very idiomatic in Haskell |
| 2025-01-11 23:04:49 +0100 | <c_wraith> | Same as every other language, really. |
| 2025-01-11 23:04:41 +0100 | <c_wraith> | Ah, that's much more common. But there's only one way out of that. Write code, ask for feedback, try out alternatives, develop your tastes. |
| 2025-01-11 23:03:35 +0100 | <ash3en> | more like non-idiomatic, too complicated, verbose code |
| 2025-01-11 23:03:16 +0100 | <ash3en> | maybe anti-pattern is not the best term |
| 2025-01-11 23:02:32 +0100 | tnt2 | tnt1 |
| 2025-01-11 23:02:32 +0100 | tnt1 | (~Thunderbi@user/tnt1) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-01-11 23:01:35 +0100 | tnt2 | (~Thunderbi@user/tnt1) tnt1 |
| 2025-01-11 23:01:12 +0100 | __monty__ | (~toonn@user/toonn) (Quit: leaving) |
| 2025-01-11 23:00:54 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) |
| 2025-01-11 22:56:10 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2025-01-11 22:54:34 +0100 | <c_wraith> | But it's rare that factoring something in terms of higher-order functions turns out to be a negative. |
| 2025-01-11 22:53:58 +0100 | <c_wraith> | there are anti-patterns in Haskell. Things like the existential typeclass pattern, which laziness turns out to be a much simpler solution to in nearly every case. |
| 2025-01-11 22:53:25 +0100 | rekahsoft | (~rekahsoft@70.51.99.237) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2025-01-11 22:46:27 +0100 | <geekosaur> | ("anti-pattern"?) |
| 2025-01-11 22:45:23 +0100 | <ash3en> | i did use them in the past already, but I often am too afraid to use anti-patterns I am not aware of |
| 2025-01-11 22:45:18 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-01-11 22:43:13 +0100 | <geekosaur> | you'll get used to HOFs eventually 🙂 |
| 2025-01-11 22:42:03 +0100 | <ash3en> | geekosaur: yes, thank you. i will keep it like this for now and maybe put them into a single function later on : ) |
| 2025-01-11 22:41:32 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | I think I'm going to stay with a helper function. :) |
| 2025-01-11 22:40:47 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2025-01-11 22:40:46 +0100 | <geekosaur> | ash3en, that works. I think you should also be able to write tokenizeNumber in terms of tokenizeString though |
| 2025-01-11 22:40:41 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | the tail blows up but the zipWith doesn't evaluate the tail on [] |
| 2025-01-11 22:40:02 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | probie: I did not |
| 2025-01-11 22:39:58 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | oh the zipWith saves you here, cute |
| 2025-01-11 22:39:44 +0100 | <lambdabot> | True |
| 2025-01-11 22:39:43 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | > (and . (zipWith (==) <*> tail)) [] |
| 2025-01-11 22:39:41 +0100 | <probie> | You didn't specify that you wanted it to be readable |
| 2025-01-11 22:39:24 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | ah yes I can read that |
| 2025-01-11 22:39:18 +0100 | tomsmeding | . o O ( (<*>) = S = \f g x -> f x (g x) ) |
| 2025-01-11 22:38:28 +0100 | <ash3en> | tomsmeding: i am not aware of something off the top of my hat |
| 2025-01-11 22:38:15 +0100 | <lambdabot> | Eq a => [a] -> Bool |
| 2025-01-11 22:38:14 +0100 | <probie> | :t and . (zipWith (==) <*> tail) |
| 2025-01-11 22:37:29 +0100 | <ash3en> | geekosaur: this is what i did now. does it look good to you? https://paste.tomsmeding.com/WfD77OU3 |
| 2025-01-11 22:32:39 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | i.e. "allEqual" |
| 2025-01-11 22:32:30 +0100 | <tomsmeding> | is there a shorter way to write (\case [] -> True ; x:xs -> all (== x) xs) |
| 2025-01-11 22:30:37 +0100 | supercode | (~supercode@user/supercode) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-01-11 22:29:38 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-01-11 22:29:29 +0100 | philopsos | (~caecilius@user/philopsos) philopsos |
| 2025-01-11 22:25:24 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2025-01-11 22:20:33 +0100 | <ash3en> | geekosaur: thank you! |
| 2025-01-11 22:20:12 +0100 | <ash3en> | i think i get it now and i will try it out |
| 2025-01-11 22:18:29 +0100 | <ncf> | monochrom: i'm still curious. how do you prove the obvious free theorem for forall a b. b -> ((a -> a) -> b) -> b ? |
| 2025-01-11 22:17:58 +0100 | <geekosaur> | you can put any Haskell code inside the braces, and as long as the type of rtToken is available (since it's generating a normal Haskell source file and not using TH, it will be) you can use it |
| 2025-01-11 22:17:58 +0100 | gmg | (~user@user/gehmehgeh) gehmehgeh |
| 2025-01-11 22:17:14 +0100 | gmg | (~user@user/gehmehgeh) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2025-01-11 22:16:47 +0100 | chexum | (~quassel@gateway/tor-sasl/chexum) chexum |
| 2025-01-11 22:16:38 +0100 | <geekosaur> | why wouldn't that work? |