Logs: liberachat/#haskell
| 2021-08-20 22:57:29 | → | Megant joins (~kaitsu@user/megant) |
| 2021-08-20 22:57:37 | → | chisui joins (~chisui@200116b86875540094408e56d6769020.dip.versatel-1u1.de) |
| 2021-08-20 22:57:51 | <monochrom> | Who draws the line between "inside CS" and "outside CS"? CS emphatically has never existed in isolation, unlike pure math. |
| 2021-08-20 22:57:57 | <sclv> | explicitforall _enables_ explicit foralls. it used to be that you needed an extension such as scopedtypevariables or gadts to enable that syntax |
| 2021-08-20 22:58:32 | <sclv> | it was weird that multiple extensions enabled a piece of syntax as a side effect, but no single extension _just_ enabled that syntax. so they made an extension to _just_ enable that syntax. |
| 2021-08-20 22:58:49 | <monochrom> | Any concept that clarifies programming and/or helps programming is fair game. (And who draws the line between "is programming" and "is not programming"?) |
| 2021-08-20 22:59:07 | <sclv> | quantification is very computer sciency |
| 2021-08-20 22:59:20 | <sclv> | its a key part of any rich type system |
| 2021-08-20 22:59:49 | <Cajun> | i guess you can really view it either way, but coming from Java it never felt like an intrinsically programming-related thing, so thats where im coming from with that |
| 2021-08-20 23:00:45 | × | o1lo01ol1o quits (~o1lo01ol1@5.181.115.89.rev.vodafone.pt) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2021-08-20 23:01:22 | <monochrom> | "I see you have a list-reverse function. Does it work no matter what my element type is?" is a fair question. The "no matter what" is quantification right there. This is a rank-1-type question. It is a fair question whether you have static or dynamic typing. A user of the reverse function in Scheme gets to ask that same question. |
| 2021-08-20 23:02:57 | <monochrom> | "I see you have a foo function that wants me to give you another function as a parameter. Does it want my function to be polymorphic? Or is it OK if I give a monomorphic function?" Now you have a rank-2-type question. |
| 2021-08-20 23:04:20 | <monochrom> | Polymorphism brings up quantification. |
| 2021-08-20 23:04:34 | × | benin036932 quits (~benin@183.82.178.142) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:05:22 | <monochrom> | You can play name games and take the stance of "'functor' is an alien math word, change it to 'mappable'; 'quantification' is an alien math word, change it to 'morphable'". |
| 2021-08-20 23:05:37 | <monochrom> | That doesn't mean you can avoid the substance. |
| 2021-08-20 23:06:43 | × | eggplantade quits (~Eggplanta@108-201-191-115.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2021-08-20 23:06:47 | <monochrom> | In fact I'm pretty convinced that such name games are just manifesting people's not-invented-here sour-grape attitude. |
| 2021-08-20 23:06:48 | × | Megant quits (~kaitsu@user/megant) (Ping timeout: 268 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:07:24 | <Cajun> | makes sense, im not trying to make the argument it isnt computer-sciency, it was just how i thought of it. always seemed like something from another field being applied in a useful manner elsewhere while retaining the same name (for consistency) |
| 2021-08-20 23:08:09 | <monochrom> | If another community has already invented the same idea, if they got there first, why not adopt their names too so we can open up more opportunities for cross-discipline conversations? Sounds like the more hip thing to do. |
| 2021-08-20 23:08:59 | <monochrom> | For this reason when I read "any time you leave the CS realm" I think "so you're talking about echo chambers". |
| 2021-08-20 23:09:01 | <Cajun> | yeah changing the names wouldnt be a good idea, doesnt change monad from being a term with a vacuous meaning to anyone without a math background :P |
| 2021-08-20 23:09:11 | <Cajun> | that wikipedia page is scary |
| 2021-08-20 23:12:50 | → | eggplantade joins (~Eggplanta@108-201-191-115.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net) |
| 2021-08-20 23:14:14 | → | Guest59 joins (~Guest59@2a02:6b64:708f:0:44ea:d3ef:31bb:9f74) |
| 2021-08-20 23:19:29 | × | tommd quits (~tommd@75-164-130-101.ptld.qwest.net) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:24:01 | × | eggplantade quits (~Eggplanta@108-201-191-115.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2021-08-20 23:24:43 | × | favonia quits (~favonia@user/favonia) (Ping timeout: 258 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:26:33 | → | eggplantade joins (~Eggplanta@108-201-191-115.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net) |
| 2021-08-20 23:30:28 | × | spruit11 quits (~quassel@2a02:a467:ccd6:1:1d3f:e608:d1ad:6d58) (Ping timeout: 258 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:31:43 | × | Guest59 quits (~Guest59@2a02:6b64:708f:0:44ea:d3ef:31bb:9f74) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2021-08-20 23:34:40 | × | waleee quits (~waleee@h-98-128-228-119.NA.cust.bahnhof.se) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:39:33 | → | Lycurgus joins (~juan@cpe-45-46-140-49.buffalo.res.rr.com) |
| 2021-08-20 23:40:43 | × | chisui quits (~chisui@200116b86875540094408e56d6769020.dip.versatel-1u1.de) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:42:43 | → | spruit11 joins (~quassel@2a02:a467:ccd6:1:6057:8486:da6d:d017) |
| 2021-08-20 23:44:23 | × | lavaman quits (~lavaman@98.38.249.169) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2021-08-20 23:44:23 | → | awschnap joins (~lavaman@98.38.249.169) |
| 2021-08-20 23:44:24 | → | favonia joins (~favonia@user/favonia) |
| 2021-08-20 23:47:26 | × | spruit11 quits (~quassel@2a02:a467:ccd6:1:6057:8486:da6d:d017) (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:48:56 | × | dolio quits (~dolio@130.44.130.54) (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2 - https://znc.in) |
| 2021-08-20 23:54:39 | → | spruit11 joins (~quassel@2a02:a467:ccd6:1:6057:8486:da6d:d017) |
| 2021-08-20 23:54:46 | → | o1lo01ol1o joins (~o1lo01ol1@5.181.115.89.rev.vodafone.pt) |
| 2021-08-20 23:54:52 | → | dolio joins (~dolio@130.44.130.54) |
| 2021-08-20 23:55:17 | × | Tuplanolla quits (~Tuplanoll@91-159-69-50.elisa-laajakaista.fi) (Quit: Leaving.) |
| 2021-08-20 23:56:07 | → | Axma67744 joins (~Axman6@user/axman6) |
| 2021-08-20 23:58:17 | × | Axman6 quits (~Axman6@user/axman6) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2021-08-20 23:59:10 | × | o1lo01ol1o quits (~o1lo01ol1@5.181.115.89.rev.vodafone.pt) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2021-08-21 00:00:01 | → | Axman6 joins (~Axman6@user/axman6) |
| 2021-08-21 00:01:07 | × | Axma67744 quits (~Axman6@user/axman6) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2021-08-21 00:06:33 | → | fresheyeball joins (~fresheyeb@c-71-237-105-37.hsd1.co.comcast.net) |
| 2021-08-21 00:07:21 | → | dajoer joins (~david@user/gvx) |
| 2021-08-21 00:09:03 | × | Axman6 quits (~Axman6@user/axman6) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2021-08-21 00:09:24 | → | gianfranco joins (~gianfranc@181.28.82.192) |
| 2021-08-21 00:09:43 | <gianfranco> | is this chat room active? |
| 2021-08-21 00:11:46 | <lechner> | sometimes |
| 2021-08-21 00:14:01 | <hpc> | technically since this chat room is only active in the moment when a message is sent, it is only infinitessimally active |
| 2021-08-21 00:14:23 | <lechner> | which means never |
| 2021-08-21 00:14:27 | <lechner> | Hi, I don't mean to open up old wounds, but why is RecordDotSyntax better than lenses? Does it finally remove the accessors from the file-level name space? |
| 2021-08-21 00:15:20 | <monochrom> | RecordDotSyntax is not better. |
| 2021-08-21 00:15:45 | <monochrom> | RecordHashSyntax would be better. SML and OCaml already do it. |
| 2021-08-21 00:16:31 | <monochrom> | But I'm pretty sure either way it doesn't take away existing syntax such as accessors. |
| 2021-08-21 00:16:51 | <monochrom> | OK, I haven't checked, I can't be sure. |
| 2021-08-21 00:17:04 | <monochrom> | You can see how much I care. |
| 2021-08-21 00:17:11 | <lechner> | i am just catching up to the group. there is no agenda |
| 2021-08-21 00:17:25 | <lechner> | is it an optional language featkre? |
| 2021-08-21 00:17:25 | <gianfranco> | oh ok |
| 2021-08-21 00:17:32 | <lechner> | feature? |
| 2021-08-21 00:17:40 | <gianfranco> | I saw this room featured on haskell.org lol |
| 2021-08-21 00:18:18 | <lechner> | what were you doing on haskell.org? |
| 2021-08-21 00:18:25 | <xsperry> | what would RecordHashSyntax do differently? just replace . character with #? |
| 2021-08-21 00:18:31 | <monochrom> | Yes. |
| 2021-08-21 00:18:48 | <gianfranco> | I'm new to haskell |
| 2021-08-21 00:18:59 | <gianfranco> | was looking for documentation mainly |
| 2021-08-21 00:19:07 | <lechner> | me too |
| 2021-08-21 00:19:42 | <lechner> | check out What I wish I knew about Haskell |
| 2021-08-21 00:19:54 | <lechner> | monochrom: why is it better? (I may agree) |
| 2021-08-21 00:20:22 | × | gianfranco quits (~gianfranc@181.28.82.192) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2021-08-21 00:20:51 | <Clint> | he wants . to have only two meanings instead of three |
| 2021-08-21 00:20:57 | <monochrom> | But lens has other powers that even real record systems cannot dream of. I would not forget about lens. |
| 2021-08-21 00:21:38 | <lechner> | Clint: was that dot an inside joke? |
| 2021-08-21 00:22:06 | × | reumeth quits (~reumeth@user/reumeth) (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) |
| 2021-08-21 00:22:35 | <Lycurgus> | real record systems |
| 2021-08-21 00:22:48 | <monochrom> | You don't want "f.g" to not mean "f . g" |
| 2021-08-21 00:22:53 | → | gianfranco joins (~gianfranc@181.28.82.192) |
| 2021-08-21 00:23:21 | <Clint> | lechner: i don't think so? |
| 2021-08-21 00:23:22 | <Lycurgus> | gianfranco, there is a beginners channel |
| 2021-08-21 00:23:24 | <lechner> | is see. it was an explicit "." |
| 2021-08-21 00:23:37 | <Lycurgus> | #haskell-beginners i think |
| 2021-08-21 00:23:56 | <monochrom> | One can get used to it, sure. One can write a parser for it, sure. But this is one of those times I get to say "can ≠ should". |
| 2021-08-21 00:23:59 | → | tommd joins (~tommd@75-164-130-101.ptld.qwest.net) |
| 2021-08-21 00:24:35 | <monochrom> | #haskell-beginners is centered around a book, not around the notion of beginner. False advertising. |
| 2021-08-21 00:25:30 | <monochrom> | And recently a learner's blog, featured in HWN, did roast the book I think. |
| 2021-08-21 00:25:53 | <Lycurgus> | well multiple off topic side channels, multiple newbies wouldn surprise |
| 2021-08-21 00:26:29 | <monochrom> | "With a book, you can’t just open a browser window and just start typing. Well, technically, you could. I read one during my 3 months of emersion that was over 1000 pages and could’ve been easily 300 pages if they had a good editor who was also a functional programmer (also known as a unicorn)." |
| 2021-08-21 00:26:42 | → | benin036932 joins (~benin@183.82.178.142) |
| 2021-08-21 00:26:50 | <monochrom> | There is only one 1000-page Haskell book. That one. |
| 2021-08-21 00:26:53 | <monochrom> | https://cscalfani.medium.com/why-is-learning-functional-programming-so-damned-hard-bfd00202a7d1 |
| 2021-08-21 00:27:08 | → | retro_ joins (~retro@5ec19a54.skybroadband.com) |
| 2021-08-21 00:27:45 | Lycurgus | is in the arduous process of going thru all his physical books to decide which to schlep and which to toss |
All times are in UTC.