News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Haskell in Production by pyrale on Thursday October 17, 2019 @06:45PM (#21287037)
What kind of error would you like to see here instead ?
Re:Haskell in Production by ppseafield on Thursday October 17, 2019 @08:36PM (#21287646)
Maybe just one extra line like this?

    Prelude> print 2 + 3

    <interactive>:3:1: error:
        • No instance for (Num (IO ())) arising from a use of ‘+’
        • The expression `print 2` :: IO ()
        • In the expression: print 2 + 3
          In an equation for ‘it’: it = print 2 + 3
Just adding the one line telling telling you what was `IO ()` is helpful. ghci obviously knows what it was here.
Re:Haskell in Production by sullyj3 on Thursday October 17, 2019 @11:54PM (#21288515)
This suggestion is a straightforward, easy to implement improvement. Many compilers have serious UX problems because their authors don't take UX seriously. Elm and Rust are two languages getting this right.
Re:Haskell in Production by RussianCow on Thursday October 17, 2019 @07:19PM (#21287257)
The Rust compiler does a great job of making suggestions for how you can fix your code, which is tremendously helpful for the majority of cases where your mistake was simple. There is no reason (in theory) that GHC can't offer the same level of guidance.