Why Maybe Is Better Than Null

Re:Why Maybe Is Better Than Null by yew on Friday April 19, 2013 @03:28PM (#5578289)

Give me a statically typed Python and a type system that can handle external hardware poking around in its memory and I'm in ;)

I'm sort of a fan of Haskell already, to tell you the truth.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Maybe Is Better Than Null by dllthomas on Friday April 19, 2013 @04:37PM (#5578587)

> Give me a statically typed Python

Not sure that's so far from Haskell, really... :-P

> and a type system that can handle external hardware poking around in its memory

Can it be in isolated places? That's doable...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Maybe Is Better Than Null by yew on Friday April 19, 2013 @05:14PM (#5578740)

Not sure that's so far from Haskell, really... :-P

Maybe it's my lack of experience talking. Haskell feels heavier in a lot of places. I think the focus on compilation in the backend is almost a downside here, too.

Can it be in isolated places? That's doable...

Depends on the application. There's a lot of hardware out there that does really weird stuff. There's some interesting work in Haskell-space (eg Atom) but I don't know how comprehensively mature it is.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Maybe Is Better Than Null by merijnv on Saturday April 20, 2013 @07:35AM (#5581057)

I actually started designing statically typed Python, since it seemed a fun exercise. Halfway in I realised I was effectively redesigning Haskell with slightly different syntax and stopped.

[ Parent | on HN ]