News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Taste of Haskell by acchow on Tuesday October 25, 2016 @04:15AM (#12786112)
If you delve deep enough into C++ TMP, it's just as expressive (more expressive in some ways) as Haskell. You can actually do dependent types in C++.
Re:A Taste of Haskell by deckiedan on Tuesday October 25, 2016 @09:31AM (#12787768)
From what I understand, C++ can do anything! But sadly, it lets you do anything.

Haskell restricts what you can do hugely. But also lets you accomplish a whole lot within what it thinks of as safety.

I like Haskell - but think it's really just a playground for trying how far functional purity can be pushed, rather than being the actual best version of that paradigm.

Probably in 10-20 years time there will be a language around which takes all those concepts and comes together as a really pleasant unsurprising friendly developer experience. Maybe it'll come from slow evolution of Haskell... stack helps a lot, and a whole bunch of GHC extensions... but it's still got a lot of very impractical elements and hangovers from the past that really need to go.

Re:A Taste of Haskell by silluk on Tuesday October 25, 2016 @09:16PM (#12793182)
It's a far cry from Haskell but I've found Rust's type system to be a breath of fresh air coming from C++. Stuff like destructuring assignment and matching on enums (or anything really) while not as powerful as their equivalents in Haskell, are still much nicer than what you can do in C++.
Re:A Taste of Haskell by acchow on Tuesday October 25, 2016 @02:54PM (#12790585)
Depends what you mean by anything. You have dependent types and subtyping, but can't express, say, a GADT.

I think Scala can probably do anything.

I agree that Haskell is probably not great for writing real world code and should be reserved for toying with ideas about PL and type theory.

Re:A Taste of Haskell by yyhhsj0521 on Tuesday October 25, 2016 @08:00AM (#12787133)
You can, but would you?