Re:Please do not attempt to simplify this code
by weberc2 on Friday December 28, 2018 @12:37PM
(#18778139)
Sure, but I doubt all of Kubernetes is written in this style, so it’s probably not worth writing everything in Haskell. Note also that there’s nothing about FP that prohibits it from addressing the aforementioned practical problems. Some Haskell-like could swoop in and totally steal Go’s lunch if they would simply prioritize practicality over experimentation.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Please do not attempt to simplify this code
by bb88 on Saturday December 29, 2018 @02:50AM
(#18782529)
> Some Haskell-like could swoop in and totally steal Go’s lunch if they would simply prioritize practicality over experimentation.
I don't know. It seems like it would be easy enough to build an AST to make sure there were no unknown conditions that didn't lead to a return statement.
Re:Please do not attempt to simplify this code
by weberc2 on Saturday December 29, 2018 @09:24AM
(#18783685)
I don’t understand how your post relates to mine. I was saying that if a static functional language focused more on simplicity, readability, good tooling and documentation, etc then it would eat Go’s lunch without trading off any of Haskell’s important characteristics (I.e., robust type safety).