Re:A philosophical difference between Haskell and Lisp (2015)
by truculent on Sunday August 02, 2020 @05:34PM
(#24031970)
I think there are some pipe-like operators in the popular Lens library (and presumably others as well). However, writing Haskell, you quickly get used to everything being backwards.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:A philosophical difference between Haskell and Lisp (2015)
by thom on Sunday August 02, 2020 @06:13PM
(#24032234)
I find the Lens operators in Haskell just the most hilarious API in all of computing, even knowing that there is some sense to it.
Re:A philosophical difference between Haskell and Lisp (2015)
by dllthomas on Sunday August 02, 2020 @07:06PM
(#24032569)
I very much enjoyed a Kmett talk where he described needing to parameterize some lens thing with an index, a monad it would operate under, the source focus, the target focus, and three different containing structures, with some pieces repeated... and then realizing the type arguments said `i m a s t a b u` and decided he had probably gone too far.
Re:A philosophical difference between Haskell and Lisp (2015)
by eru on Monday August 03, 2020 @12:08AM
(#24034145)
What's interesting is that Ed Kmett isn't even a dyed in the wool Haskeller. He has more than a foot in the C++ world.
He's quite brilliant, but I still haven't really gotten used to the full power of lenses, yet. I only used them in simple ways.
Re:A philosophical difference between Haskell and Lisp (2015)
by truculent on Monday August 03, 2020 @05:59AM
(#24035864)
While I have found the majority of my interactions with Haskell (and ML family languages) deeply satisfying, I have never really used Lens in anger, having been put off each time I've tried to get into it. Although, I remain slightly simpathetic since - as you say - there is some theory underlying it all.
I may be mistaken, but I think I have seen a handful of "Lens-lite" type libraries for use in production since it's such a large library, which seems.. uh.. suboptimal.