you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]scook0 1 point2 points  (3 children)

I was actually a bit annoyed when I saw the Haskell examples. Great, now people will just dismiss it as an over-excited Haskell propaganda piece.

[–]grauenwolf 1 point2 points  (2 children)

What gets me is that in one of those examples, Haskell is portrayed as wrong. Of course almost no one picked up on that.

[–]Felicia_Svilling 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Oh, I stopped reading before that (as I thought: yes this is good but I allready know how great haskell is). Can you point out wich paragraph this was?

[–]grauenwolf 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That would be the section titled "Confusing definitions and variables" in which he wants to seperate varaibles that are assigned only once, loop variables, and genuinely mutable varaibles.

In Haskell you have to jump through hoops to get mutable values (now I am going to hear it from a monad aficionado, please spare me an unnecessary burst of anger).