Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>Keep in mind that writing something like this is not actually going to be perceived as helpful to most people who may have difficulty with Haskell

No, but hopefully it well help people who have yet to learn Haskell that not everyone thinks it's particularly difficult. I'm not interested in convincing the people who've tried and given up on it.

>That's great, but to people for whom they don't come so easily, this could easily be considered discouraging, or else bragging.

So what do you propose? That I pretend it's really hard for me, even though it's not? What effect do you think that's going to have?

>So unless you're SPJ or beyond, I wouldn't be quick to claim that Haskell isn't "unusually hard to learn."

You don't have to be SPJ to learn Haskell (or talk about how hard it is). Do I have to be Stroustrup to pass judgement on how hard it is to learn C++?

>In particular people who are older and have "work/life balance," ... and the life part of that work/life balance doesn't allow much time to do so.

I obviously don't mean that Haskell is easy for every single person in the world to learn; I mean that, as far as languages go, it's relatively easy enough to learn. If I didn't have enough time to learn Haskell, I also wouldn't have enough time to learn C++ or Python.

> but just maybe don't be so glib to claim it is not hard.

Again, what do you propose? Lie and tell people that it's super hard, so I don't hurt their feelings if they can't figure it out?



So what do you propose? That I pretend it's really hard for me, even though it's not? What effect do you think that's going to have?

Again, what do you propose? Lie and tell people that it's super hard, so I don't hurt their feelings if they can't figure it out?

I don't anybody is suggesting lying about your own personal experience with Haskell. Rather your posts state that it was easy for you and that it should be relatively easy for everyone.

I think that when programmers from other languages are having trouble figuring out how to write a particular program in Haskell, whether it be due to documentation, the behavior of the code execution, or even language syntax, it doesn't make sense to claim that it should be relatively easy for them.

In my (limited) experience with Haskell, there can be hang-ups that someone with experience in strictly-evaluated languages isn't expecting. [1]

[1] https://wiki.haskell.org/Iteratee_I/O#The_problem_with_lazy_...


Maybe consider a little humility first.


Does it demonstrate a lack of humility to be honest about how difficult something was for me? I'm sorry my truthful assessment offends you. If humility means pretending things are harder than they are, then I guess I don't have any humility.


Whether we find it offensive or not isn't relevant. Your comments are degrading to those who find it difficult, and you are actively hostile when they complain or we point this out.

Your attitude is one I see too often in the FP community, and well-meaning or not it holds us all back.


>Your comments are degrading to those who find it difficult

Again, what do you propose I do about it? Should I never say anything positive about anything, lest I offend someone who had a bad experience?

>Your attitude is one I see too often in the FP community

Which attitude is that? Optimism?


> Should I never say anything

Well if you can't understand why your phrasing turns a positive idea into making somebody feel bad, probably.

> Which attitude is that? Optimism?

A version of it, yes. The "if you don't find it easy you are the problem" attitude.


You seem kind of hooked up on the "easy for you" part, which really isn't the part anyone cares about. I can't even comprehend how you came to the conclusion that you are being asked to lie.

Maybe a more constructive (humble?) approach would be to show others why it was easy for you, subjective as that may be, and how they can achieve faster comprehension levels based on your own experiences.


I'd like to see examples that start with a Java or JavaScript program, then try to translate them to Haskell and documents the thought-process of figuring out how the Haskell solution is and needs to be different.

Haskell aims to be a terse language, right? That's one reason that makes it difficult to "read" it and if you can't read it it's hard to learn it.

Think about learning to read and write Chinese when all you know is English. The only way to do it is to have a text-book that shows you sentences in both English and Chinese. I don't think it is necessarily "difficult" to learn Chinese, but you need learning materials targeted to an English-speaker.


That's exactly why most FP articles and tutorials around the net didn't help me, but Dan Grossman's "programming languages" coursera course did.

If (when) I ever learn enough to talk about why OCaml is better in detail, it will be with concrete examples not buzzword bingo :)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: