News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why I prefer scheme to Haskell. Parent comment

Re:Why I prefer scheme to Haskell by gtani on Monday April 09, 2012 @11:57AM (#3817531)
Haskell is very fun, and well tutorialized now (2nd half of Thompson book is very good tutorial(2nd ed, $5), there are small speed bumps:

I needed a little better glossary than book provides for "invariant", "witness", other terms folks sling around. It took me a while to figure out hoogle, and I needed to ignore blog posts about bijective vs surjective functions and category theory as a beginner. Also the ghc instance extensions are probably the most thinly documented corner:

    TypeSynonymInstances, -XUndecidableInstances, Flexible, Overlapping, etc
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why I prefer scheme to Haskell by SkyMarshal on Monday April 09, 2012 @05:06PM (#3819231)
While we're at it, let me throw out a shoutout for Learn You a Haskell For Great Good. One of the best programming books I've read, Miran is excellent at explaining programming concepts.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why I prefer scheme to Haskell by daivd on Tuesday April 10, 2012 @09:44AM (#3822117)
There are good tutorials to Haskell, but it seems to me that Haskell best practices still evolves fairly quickly. After "Real World Haskell" and "Learn you a Haskell", I still did not know what most of the GHC extensions are for (especially those related to generalizing types seem interesting), how to write idiomatic IO-code (conduits now, apparently? Or is it Pipes?), or how I should choose between the many ways of computing on many cores. Is Data Parallel Haskell mature enough? STM? The par combinator? accelerate? I don't think they mention Template Haskell (which seems powerful). The recommended way to connect to SQL is also in a state of flux (possibly "persistent"?).
[ Parent | on HN ]