Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [extremeperl] Book: Higher Order Perl

Expand Messages
  • Adam Turoff
    ... Higher order programming is a solid win. This is one of the main points behind functional programming in general, and Haskell in particular. (And, while
    Message 1 of 58 , Mar 28, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      On Mar 28, 2005, at 2:24 PM, Rob Nagler wrote:
      > Adam Turoff writes:
      >> The net effect of being a purely functional language is that Haskell
      >> forces you to decompose problems differently.
      > I always thought that was the customer's job. ;-) Seriously, is there
      > any evidence that forcing programs to decompose problems the Haskell
      > way is any better than the Perl way?

      Higher order programming is a solid win. This is one of the main points
      behind functional programming in general, and Haskell in particular.
      (And, while we're on the subject, HOP. ;-)

      I can't compare Haskell to Perl directly, but there was an interesting
      comparison between Haskell and a handful of other languages about 11
      ago. The net result is that the Haskell implementations were more
      featureful, more concise, and took significantly less time to write than
      the alternatives:


      There are similar anecdotal results from programming competitions over
      the last few years. But again, no direct comparisons to Perl.

      > http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/HaskellDbTutorial
      > Do you have experience with this? Is it better to program this way
      > than with good old SQL?

      Haven't tried that yet. But I haven't seen anything that would
      preclude using more standard database handling idioms, or talking
      directly to the PostgreSQL stack.

      > Compiling, how quaint. :-) I've got a friend who programs Eiffel for
      > a living. He waits 20 mins for the compiler to work things out before
      > he can run an acceptance test.

      I won't speak to Eiffel. I don't see how that's relevant to why there
      is or isn't a compelling reason to learn Haskell or other functional

      > I haven't found the
      > lack of type safety in Perl to be hindrance in performance or quality
      > so I'd like to see some evidence that programming in a type safe
      > language is any better for the customer. Are there any studies out
      > there that compare programming Perl vs Haskell to do the same job?

      Um, that's quite a non-sequitur.

      I thought the issue was why it's worthwhile to learn a functional
      now that Higher Order Perl is out. No one is talking about ditching
      for Haskell, or anything beyond finding a few more ways to do it.

      If you can't justify learning a language like Haskell, don't sweat it.
      Just buy a copy of Higher Order Perl for your desk, a copy for your
      your night table, a copy for your backpack, a couple of copies to lend
      to your friends and colleagues, and a copy to keep on the coffee table
      to flip through during halftime. ;-)

      -- Adam
    • Tom Vilot
      ... Wait. That sounds like Rob .... ;c) (kidding) ... Wait. That *also* sounds like Rob ... ... (not kidding!)
      Message 58 of 58 , Apr 8, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Greg C wrote:

        > Consider: projects A and B have identical goals. In project A, you
        > have free
        > rein in your choice of software and hardware tools. However, the
        > manager sets
        > arbitrary deadlines, likes to stand behind people and criticize their
        > code as
        > they type,

        Wait. That sounds like Rob ....
        ;c) (kidding)

        > On project B, the choice of langauge and hardware are made for you and
        > there's
        > only one computer per two programmers. On the other hand, the manager
        > sees his
        > people as people, negotiates requirements and schedules on a realistic
        > basis,
        > trusts his people, follows a set of best practices (be it XP or some
        > other) and
        > chases everyone out of the office at 5:30.

        Wait. That *also* sounds like Rob ...


        (not kidding!)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.