And you want to share the magic with everybody, because things can be so much better! Of course once you're in paradigm 2 it's a lot easier to dismiss innovations in paradigm 1, so it's harder to rebalance. Blub paradox goes both ways!
-
Show this thread
-
I think it's easy to remain an evangelist for your second paradigm, beause- again- you have this knowledge of how things can be different. The best ways to break that, IMO, is to either seriously reapproach the first paradigm with fresh eyes, or learn a third paradigm.
1 reply 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
Something that breaks the conception that there's one Good Way and one Bad Way. Something that either reorients yourself towards thinking about tradeoffs or something that makes you think languages aren't all that different in the end.
2 replies 1 retweet 9 likesShow this thread -
One supporting anecdote is I've seen a few Haskell programmers who talk about how much better FP is than IP get super into Rust Anecdote two: people who know 3 or more paradigms start identifying as polyglots instead of FPers Neither is conclusive evidence, of course
6 replies 2 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
I'd love to read an ethnography of people who started with typed FP and then learned, like, Eiffel or Esterel or something
3 replies 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @hillelogram
For what it's worth Haskell was more or less the first language I learned seriously, and I've then gone on to study your more standard OO languages like Java et alii. I think Haskell could use a few things from Java tbh..
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @cronokirby
Fascinating! Would you mind sharing more? Though I admit I know barely any Haskell or Java :/
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hillelogram
I think going in the other direction makes you more tolerant of the faults of non-FP stuff, and more honest about FPs faults. I tend to think that the merits of purity are often exaggerated, and that short-circuiting control flow is often much clearer, among other things
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @cronokirby @hillelogram
One thing that OO languages tend to get very right is discoverability: type "." after something in your IDE and you can see everything you can do with that object immediately. FP langs don't tend to put as much focus on modules, although nothing precludes them from doing so.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @cronokirby
I honestly find that pretty surprising, since the module system in like ocaml is pretty cutting edge, and I've seen the crazy tooling Idris is capable of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOtKD7ml0NU … My bias is that tooling is more a consequence of investment than any features of the language proper
5 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
I'd say that typing "." is an example of type-driven development in action, albeit a small one. Much more investment in tooling is necessary, though it's still amusing what Idris can do with what is essentially an ad-hoc weekend hack :).
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.