Newest at the top
| 2025-03-04 00:24:59 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-03-04 00:22:12 +0100 | __monty__ | (~toonn@user/toonn) (Quit: leaving) |
| 2025-03-04 00:19:34 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 00:17:54 +0100 | LainExperiments | (~LainExper@user/LainExperiments) LainExperiments |
| 2025-03-04 00:14:44 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee |
| 2025-03-04 00:14:15 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 00:12:59 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@syn-047-229-123-186.res.spectrum.com) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 00:09:37 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-03-04 00:02:16 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@syn-047-229-123-186.res.spectrum.com) peterbecich |
| 2025-03-03 23:58:40 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-03-03 23:55:23 +0100 | Unicorn_Princess | (~Unicorn_P@user/Unicorn-Princess/x-3540542) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2025-03-03 23:54:13 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-03-03 23:51:30 +0100 | jmcantrell | (~weechat@user/jmcantrell) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2025-03-03 23:49:41 +0100 | econo_ | (uid147250@id-147250.tinside.irccloud.com) |
| 2025-03-03 23:49:08 +0100 | myxos | (~myxos@syn-065-028-251-121.res.spectrum.com) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-03-03 23:48:10 +0100 | LainExperiments | (~LainExper@user/LainExperiments) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2025-03-03 23:47:41 +0100 | <monochrom> | In Haskell, if you use the async library (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/async), it is actually not too different from the Python version. |
| 2025-03-03 23:45:32 +0100 | ljdarj1 | ljdarj |
| 2025-03-03 23:45:31 +0100 | ljdarj | (~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) (Ping timeout: 268 seconds) |
| 2025-03-03 23:44:49 +0100 | <constxd> | i have to defer the application of f with its arguments until the bind operation that unwraps the pure value |
| 2025-03-03 23:43:47 +0100 | <constxd> | and then it's literally just pure |
| 2025-03-03 23:43:39 +0100 | <constxd> | in haskell it doesn't matter i guess because you just apply f immediately, there's no difference |
| 2025-03-03 23:43:12 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
| 2025-03-03 23:43:08 +0100 | ljdarj1 | (~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) ljdarj |
| 2025-03-03 23:42:49 +0100 | <jackdk> | Liamzee: any chance you can say more about the problem you're modelling? |
| 2025-03-03 23:42:34 +0100 | <jackdk> | Liamzee: I have never found OOP to be a scalable technique. As soon as you work on two types of data, you have to make hard choices about which OOclass "owns" the method, or invent dubious nouns to hold a single function of two arguments. |
| 2025-03-03 23:42:03 +0100 | <monochrom> | jackdk: This is how I teach Haskell type classes. At the end there is also a little discussion about C++ and Java. https://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~trebla/CSCC24-latest/04-haskell-types-2.html |
| 2025-03-03 23:41:57 +0100 | <constxd> | but in a language with colored async functions (python), i have this: def foo(f, *xs): async def g(): return f(*xs); return g |
| 2025-03-03 23:40:32 +0100 | <constxd> | i guess maybe this question doesn't really make sense in haskell |
| 2025-03-03 23:40:08 +0100 | <monochrom> | either that, or at call sites just "pure (f x)" without making a name for it. |
| 2025-03-03 23:39:45 +0100 | <monochrom> | I think I'll just use "pure . f" |
| 2025-03-03 23:39:32 +0100 | <constxd> | wait no |
| 2025-03-03 23:39:22 +0100 | <constxd> | foo f x = pure (f x) |
| 2025-03-03 23:38:58 +0100 | <constxd> | what might u name this function? |
| 2025-03-03 23:38:50 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-03-03 23:38:29 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> so, ummm, if i were to do a more OOP-ish appproach, I guess what I'd be looking for would be to set up data modules and do import qualified as? |
| 2025-03-03 23:37:57 +0100 | <monochrom> | OK sorry. I didn't intend it. |
| 2025-03-03 23:37:21 +0100 | <int-e> | monochrom: your condescension has been noted and is totally uncalled for |
| 2025-03-03 23:37:14 +0100 | <jackdk> | It would be cool to see you teach someday |
| 2025-03-03 23:37:07 +0100 | <monochrom> | For example, as said, either I bridge with "like C++ operator overloading" or "both Java and Haskell try to solve this same problem but they came up with different approaches because the solution has to fit with the rest of the language". |
| 2025-03-03 23:36:07 +0100 | <monochrom> | int-e, jackdk: I am a good teacher, I do bridging all the time, and actually precisely because of that, my bridges are much clearer and have more predictive power than puny "is like". |
| 2025-03-03 23:34:40 +0100 | <jackdk> | monochrom: 'why do people have to speak in simpleton amoeba terms of "is like, is not like"?' I see it as "first you have to get a rope across the chasm': you get some idea across and then you refine the wrong idea into a less wrong idea. IME, not as many people can grok a concept from definitions up |
| 2025-03-03 23:34:34 +0100 | <monochrom> | Oh I have already long concluded that they are on drugs. |
| 2025-03-03 23:34:09 +0100 | <dolio> | When you're talking about "doses" and stuff. |
| 2025-03-03 23:33:57 +0100 | <dolio> | Careful. People will think you're on drugs or something. |
| 2025-03-03 23:33:50 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> but afaik haskell doesn't favor using ad-hoc typeclasses does it, because the syntax is often much worse (need to write instances to multiple typeclasses is obnoxious) |
| 2025-03-03 23:32:57 +0100 | j1n37 | (~j1n37@user/j1n37) j1n37 |
| 2025-03-03 23:32:41 +0100 | zungi | (~tory@user/andrewchawk) andrewchawk |
| 2025-03-03 23:32:13 +0100 | <jle`> | so that's nice |
| 2025-03-03 23:32:08 +0100 | <jle`> | there is a decent overlap between coffee snobs and programmers |