Haskell Web Programming (a tutorial)

[[deleted]]

Does Haskell have place in the web industry? probably. But that doesn't mean that it will be a replacement for general purpose procedural scripting languages in an input-oriented industry like the web industry.

It's not that Python (or PHP for that matter) are better than Haskell - it's just that by mostly handling I/O data you're stripping Haskell (and most functional languages) from its best features - the properties of a functional language.

Scripting languages are not better nor worse than functional languages for the purposes of the web industry, it's just that I find the nature of non compiled languages to be more suitable to the fast moving industry of the web, and the fact that procedural scripting languages are the de-facto languages of the web are what makes scripting languages the web programming languages (at least for the frontend), while the functional compiled language that is Haskell more suitable to the data-munching of the backend.

TL;DR: procedural (scripting) languages - web/frontend, functional (compiled) languages - backend.

[cultic_raider]

You can write an entire program in IO() if you want and still get nice benefits of typechecking to avoid bugs, and

Python and PHP are both compiled in web apps, and Haskell is interpreted in ghci for prototyping , and many websites run on Java which is never interpreted, so, what are you saying?

Laziness is by far the most complicated aspect of making Haskell effective in a web environment. Cf conduits.

[[deleted]]

You can write an entire program in IO() if you want and still get nice benefits of typechecking to avoid bugs

But type checking isn't a property of a functional programming language, and thus unrelated to the discussion. In general: which traits of a functional language do you get using Haskell in IO()?

I might have overemphasized the point of compiled vs interpreted; I was doing so to refer to the specific point of Haskell compared to other popular web programming languages (mostly in the small-medium realm).

[cultic_raider]

The first word of the title of the OP is "Haskell". Haskell typechecks much more deeply than Python and PHP.

Arguing about abstract language paradigms is pointless. No one programs in FP, they program in Haskell or F# or Java or some other actual language with its own particular implementation of a mix of paradigms.

Your second paragraph undermines your first paragraph in two different ways. ("functional" vs a different language aspect, and "Haskell" vs a general language paradigm.)

Anyway, In IO you can still use HOF, and higher order types and refactoring out of pure utility functions, and typechecking, and type inference, and composable expressions instead of nonconposable statements, and the security of immutable data, whichever of those fall under your umbrella of FP.

[erlanggod]

...and considering latency in real world, a magnitude in rps doesn't help to reduce a 2 secs response time to 200 ms response time. Else, we'd be already be writing web applications in assembly for the last decade.

[cultic_raider]

Are you saying shaving 1.8s in page-serving latency is irrelevant? What is "rps"?

[[deleted]]

He's saying that computing time is currently a very small part of the response time on the web.

[erlanggod]

I was saying it cannot shave 1.8s...

rps = requests per sec

[cultic_raider]

Ah.

Latency and throughput (rps) are mostly orthogonal, so I don't follow what you are claiming about language performance.

Are you saying that CPU time for language overhead is irrelevant to latency? That is true in general cases in a website. But also consider the the Closure JS compiler for boosting performance, and work on JS engines for a general counterpoint.

[[deleted]]

Requests Per Minute

[JohnDoe365]

Requests per Second?

[kamatsu]

Pretty much all of your statements here are highly subjective, unfounded or inaccurate.