Newest at the top
| 2026-02-26 14:23:47 +0100 | haritz | (~hrtz@user/haritz) haritz |
| 2026-02-26 14:23:47 +0100 | haritz | (~hrtz@2a01:4b00:bc2e:7000:d5af:a266:ca31:5ef8) (Changing host) |
| 2026-02-26 14:23:47 +0100 | haritz | (~hrtz@2a01:4b00:bc2e:7000:d5af:a266:ca31:5ef8) |
| 2026-02-26 14:23:45 +0100 | <Clint> | it's not always a good reason ;P |
| 2026-02-26 14:22:36 +0100 | tales | (~tales@149.167.1.176) |
| 2026-02-26 14:22:31 +0100 | realBeginner | (~realBegin@164.215.171.125) (Quit: Ping timeout (120 seconds)) |
| 2026-02-26 14:21:40 +0100 | <geekosaur> | for something like C or C++ there's enough overlap not to be a problem, but there's a reason why other languages always tell you to use their installers and/or sandboxes |
| 2026-02-26 14:20:57 +0100 | <geekosaur> | just remember that, on any distro, their language packages support their needs, not yours |
| 2026-02-26 14:20:33 +0100 | <geekosaur> | it's fine if you ignore their packages and use ghcup |
| 2026-02-26 14:19:56 +0100 | <realBeginner> | My distro is Arch‑based; is that okay, or should I choose another distro that supports Haskell? |
| 2026-02-26 14:18:00 +0100 | <ski> | a textbook might also be nice |
| 2026-02-26 14:17:44 +0100 | <lambdabot> | <https://github.com/byorgey/haskell-course>,<https://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cis194/spring13/lectures.html> |
| 2026-02-26 14:17:43 +0100 | <ski> | @where CIS194 |
| 2026-02-26 14:17:06 +0100 | <oskarw> | Try out haskell, if you have any problems just ask here. Here is haskell study guide I can recommend https://github.com/soupi/haskell-study-plan |
| 2026-02-26 14:16:36 +0100 | <realBeginner> | The idea that there are infinitely many numbers between 0 and 1 is really amazing to me, I just enjoy thinking about these subjects. |
| 2026-02-26 14:16:03 +0100 | <oskarw> | Actual geometry enjoyer |
| 2026-02-26 14:13:30 +0100 | arandombit | (~arandombi@user/arandombit) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2026-02-26 14:13:23 +0100 | <realBeginner> | I enjoy geometry |
| 2026-02-26 14:13:14 +0100 | misterfish | (~misterfis@31-161-39-137.biz.kpn.net) misterfish |
| 2026-02-26 14:10:25 +0100 | <oskarw> | Also, do you like math? |
| 2026-02-26 14:10:10 +0100 | misterfish | (~misterfis@31-161-39-137.biz.kpn.net) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) |
| 2026-02-26 14:09:45 +0100 | <oskarw> | realBeginner: If you want to broaden your way of thinking, than haskell certainly can do that |
| 2026-02-26 14:09:01 +0100 | <realBeginner> | I love learning how to think and enjoy making complex things easier to do. |
| 2026-02-26 14:08:50 +0100 | <oskarw> | newmind: But together with parser it really throw me off. When I done some implementations for list for applicative and doing other exercises from typeclassopedia I didn't had that much of a problem |
| 2026-02-26 14:08:48 +0100 | tales | (~tales@149.167.1.176) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
| 2026-02-26 14:07:04 +0100 | <oskarw> | ski: I know you like sexps ;) |
| 2026-02-26 14:06:23 +0100 | <oskarw> | merijn: From which source did your girlfriend learned Haskell? |
| 2026-02-26 14:05:13 +0100 | <newmind> | i think it's the first time you encounter something that really has no sensible analog in procedural/oop programming |
| 2026-02-26 14:05:01 +0100 | <oskarw> | realBeginner: Do you have like dream program you want to make? Maybe we can help you more in recommending your programming lanugage based on this answer |
| 2026-02-26 14:04:43 +0100 | tromp | (~textual@2001:1c00:3487:1b00:7955:9591:6018:7ef9) (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…) |
| 2026-02-26 14:04:34 +0100 | tales | (~tales@149.167.1.176) |
| 2026-02-26 14:03:34 +0100 | <oskarw> | newmind: I remember spend _a lot of time_ on applicative exercise from cis194 |
| 2026-02-26 14:03:30 +0100 | <ski> | realBeginner : Lisps (like e.g. Scheme), and Prolog, have quite simple concrete syntax. Haskell is a bit more complicated, but, for the most part, i'd say, fairly regular, few corner cases/exceptions |
| 2026-02-26 14:03:04 +0100 | divya | (divya@140.238.251.170) divya |
| 2026-02-26 14:02:03 +0100 | <Leary> | realBeginner: Haskell is certainly the language most concerned with regularity. |
| 2026-02-26 14:01:58 +0100 | <darkling> | Haskell is definitely mathematical catnip. |
| 2026-02-26 14:00:59 +0100 | ChaiTRex | (~ChaiTRex@user/chaitrex) ChaiTRex |
| 2026-02-26 14:00:27 +0100 | ChaiTRex | (~ChaiTRex@user/chaitrex) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2026-02-26 14:00:23 +0100 | <oskarw> | Maybe because I had mathematical education I didn't have problems with haskell... |
| 2026-02-26 14:00:21 +0100 | <newmind> | applicative was my real "hard to get my head around" barrier |
| 2026-02-26 13:59:54 +0100 | <oskarw> | Outside of implementation of parsers in applicative, I didn't had problems with haskell, thought this was more about that I didn't know anything about parsers |
| 2026-02-26 13:59:02 +0100 | <newmind> | like: are typeclasses like java/c# interfaces? well.. a bit, yeah, but not quite |
| 2026-02-26 13:58:57 +0100 | <darkling> | I realised I was writing things in ever more functional style in my Python, and explicitly went looking for something to learn the details. I landed on Erlang. |
| 2026-02-26 13:58:43 +0100 | <ski> | oskarw : it's possibly easier to learn Haskell, if you don't know another language yet |
| 2026-02-26 13:58:25 +0100 | divya | (divya@140.238.251.170) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2026-02-26 13:58:17 +0100 | <darkling> | oskarw: That's where I came to functional programming from. :) |
| 2026-02-26 13:58:08 +0100 | <newmind> | you tend to look for analogs and similarities that just don't quite work, and it's frustrating to get stuck on problems you already know should be easy to solve |
| 2026-02-26 13:58:04 +0100 | <oskarw> | You can write functional code in python /s |
| 2026-02-26 13:57:33 +0100 | <merijn> | newmind: I agree |
| 2026-02-26 13:57:27 +0100 | <newmind> | merijn: i have the strong suspicion that haskell is actually harder (or at least: more frustrating) to learn if you're already proficient in imperative languages |