News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Verb-Noun vs. Noun-Verb by Twisol on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:11PM (#21274949)
Agreed. Some functional languages (like F#) have a pipelining operator |> that gives the same syntactic impression:

    list |> map (1+) |> filter odd |> sum
Re:Verb-Noun vs. Noun-Verb by the_gipsy on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @06:53PM (#21276898)
I have found myself using pipes many times in Elm, because they make the code so much more readable. Now I understand why!

I haven't seen an autocomplete that works on pipes. But with a good type system, it is technically possible to list all compatible functions that take "noun" as first parameter.

Sometimes you supply partially applied functions (also with pipes in noun->verb order) and that's not so easy to match:

noun |> verb1 |> (otherNoun >> verb2) |> etc

But perhaps even functions that take "noun" as nth parameter could be suggested.

Re:Verb-Noun vs. Noun-Verb by codr7 on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @06:36PM (#21276756)
And other languages, such as Forth; don't need one.

    list map filter odd sum
Re:Verb-Noun vs. Noun-Verb by Twisol on Thursday October 17, 2019 @12:04AM (#21278818)
Huh. I would've expected it to be `odd filter`, not `filter odd`.
Re:Verb-Noun vs. Noun-Verb by zwaps on Thursday October 17, 2019 @02:30AM (#21279438)
Interestingly enough, the now standard data manipulation package in R, dplyr, uses pipelines.
Re:Verb-Noun vs. Noun-Verb by karmakaze on Sunday October 20, 2019 @12:32PM (#21305162)
Good to learn me some F#, looks like Elixir.