Why I Don't Code in Haskell Anymore?

As someone who mostly programs in C, any package manager that actually exists is magic to me.

Roc is on the way man, and damn it does look promising

Can you recommend any books about haskell?

Haskell uses a different paradigm, it's OK not to understand how to write maintainable code in it. It's hard, don;t be sorry for yourselves... many successful people never mastered Haskell, nor algebra, and they were considered true engineers by most.

Haskell is fun :P

any thoughts on purescript?

mathematics are as dumb as engineers, that's why i studied physics

I never coded much Haskell myself like you did, though I did read allot about it and watched your videos amongst many others because the language is really nice like you noted. I seem to never actually used it practically for the same negative reasons as you pointed as well. There are just too much good alternatives to use out there which are usually far easier to learn and are far more practical to use. Nevertheless I enjoyed your Haskell videos and learned quite a bit more about how it all works.

Simon Peyton Jones for one dropped out of maths at Oxford before finishing (second year IIRC). In a recent talk about the history of the language and GHC he said the maths degree at Oxford was too hard. I don't know about the other contributors to the languages design and toolset. But he for one isn't a mathematician (though obviously no slouch at various parts of mathematics like category theory).

The other problem with Haskell is that it runs on a VM, like Go and Java. That's why the language is not suitable for system programming.

Is it something that can be fixed ?
I mean, is it just because there not enough tools that make your life easier (Like in JavaScript, nvm, yarn and shit ) or is the language fundamentally unrecoverable ?

You defined an opportunity: create a maintainable Haskell.🙂🙏

aw man i get into haskell because of your videos. you're totally right about the math folks building languages part

Maybe FSharp is for you

"Porn Folder: 9.2 GiB" 🧐

cabal (haven't used stack), does suck. However, I think it sucks because its way too involved. You should be able to just say you want package x, and then run package x, but because everything is so hooked to their dependency versions and so many customizable options, it is really really hard to use and a huge pain in the ass. That's not to say it can't work correctly, but it is to say that I've spent at least as much time just learning how to work with cabal as I have having to learn about haskell. The expectation for the developer to get cabal to work right is just too involved, however, I do think a lot of this can be solved simply by containerization.
This doesn't solve maintainability and upgrading packages, which is kind of its own beast, but at least you don't end up with hundreds of competing dependencies in a global environment.

Nix ? I think nix has answers to all of these issues.

I think Haskell is an interesting and expressive language, but I gotta agree that maintenance, from my limited experience in it, does seem like a nightmare. The error messages can be very obfuscated, like with how it says there's a type error in a function for example, as well as just the syntax of the language can be a bit difficult to read coming from the imperative side of the programming world.

I really hope there is an achievable solution for Haskell's toolchain

You seem like a 10x developer. Or 100x. We have one student in my program who is like you: on another level. I am just a programming NPC, in awe of the good people. 😢

So…what is a good alternative to Haskell? Something that enhances functional style and with an elegant syntax yet isn’t a pain in the ass for packaging/building? I agree, stack and cabal seem like they were created by HS students…

What about using something like F#?

Just curious why don't you give Ocaml and F# a try? I'd like you to do stuff with that.

I now can understand. I 'd give it a try and then I run into trouble with stack, I had to fall back to cabal and the joke is the .cabal file is overwritten if one uses stack and so I have a package manager which can give me an file for the cabal build system but I can not use the package manager to build it really. That sucks ...

What happened to frege?

How amusing, I'm using your parser as a project to orientate myself into how you actually go about development, and here you refute the language. Ultimately I suppose most people who wish to work in Haskell are more interested in a new way of thinking, rather than creating working solutions.

"Haskell is developed by mathematicians" is not even funny, original oe good trolling. Plenty of dev team use Haskell's tooling to produce maintainable and Effi code.

As a mathematician, I wouldn’t dream of using Haskell. Julia is another language designed by mathematicians and it manages to look elegant without sacrificing functionality

Why don't use F# or Ocaml

Just write your own tooling kekw

bullshit...

Is this video very old? Cabal is pretty damn good currently.

Agree

With all due respect to mathematicians, I don't think that a mathematician should have the ability to create a programming language. This requires knowledge from multiple areas, including software engineering. Furthermore, I don't believe that it necessarily has to be great mathematicians; a person is likely to excel most in what they do frequently.

what do you recommend instead of Haskell?

If you think the Haskell tool chain in a pain in the ass, why not develop some tools to make it better?

Haskell community might be the most gate keepy in software, I dont imagine they see their build tools as an issue.

Haskell is very fun to learn and then apply the stuff you learned somewhere else

ниасилил кабал, лол и кек. Ещё и под виндой поди.

Yes, their syntax is crap too

I love Haskell, it’s incredibly fulfilling to be productive in it but it’s true that it’s a complete PITA.

When I picked up Go i realized what a completely abusive relationship I was in with Haskell.

Thank you! Haskell is giving me fits and I am trying to learn it but you've nailed part of my problem.

Once i read somewhere that Haskell is NOT a good first functional programming language because you spend more time learning Haskell itself than functional programming.

Right now that i am learning haskell (first FP language i am learning) i couldn't agree more; quirks of haskell sytanx is giving me more trouble than lambda calculus and type enforcement combined. How scoping works is bane of my existence.

I think i will be much happier learning OCaml and just be mindful not write imperative code.

Somebody clue me in, is C better on this front?

This is a super L take.

Haskell's tooling doesn't suck because "Haskell is created by mathematicians and mathematicians aren't great software engineers". Mathematicians make fantastic software engineers.

Haskell's tooling sucks because it has very little resources put into it. Cabal is like an afterthought side-project of Duncan Coutts, who has two full time jobs already teaching and working as a consultant. Do you understand how incredible of an engineer you have to be to maintain a project like Cabal in your spare time with two other full time jobs? Literally ONLY mathematicians can be that good at software engineering.

Haskell's tooling was actually pretty great for back in the day with ghc-pkg etc, back then programming languages didn't typically come with package managers, so Haskell largely pioneered the model that is now the gold-standard today.

The industry has simply taken these ideas and improved on them incrementally, and Haskell hasn't kept up because it doesn't have any money behind it.

For the record, I agree Haskell is not suitable to use in industry specifically because it has poor tooling. But mathematicians make outstanding software engineers, and they are typically incredibly practical and pragmatic engineers despite the uninformed stereotypes.

All Haskell enjoyers have been brainwashed by Big Lambda

If you say cabal and stack are hard to use, yes that's actually true, especially for cabal. But if you say haskell code itself is hard to maintain, that is very untrue and completely wrong. The language itself and types are very good in terms of maintainability, the faults in the tool chains can improve over time.

Too many transformations without stopping to name a transformation and its components fights maintainability by failing to name and abstract the meanings of your problem domain.

A small rant about Cabal and Stack... that's it? Talk about a click-bait video.

How do you like my Data Center?