Why haven't you learned Ocaml yet?
Because Haskell is infinitely better.
>>54123576
I consider functional programming of no practical use - only used in academia and research
Terrible Windows support.
becasue getting cum on muh bitch face earns me shkelim, goym
>>54123576
Why should I?
>>54123576
literally what?
>>54123609
/thread
>>54123609
If it has no practical use then why have the biggest languages spent the past few years focusing on adding functional features?
>>54123792
because HACKademics need more FINANCING every jewish year and they got it, thanks to you, the gullible tax payer
>GOYM
>>54123576
I have tbH. Best language by far, too bad it doesn't have enough libraries. Thankfully, the libraries it does have are very high-quality, i.e. the exact opposite of haskell where there are 50 libraries for everything, but none of them are even remotely usable.
>>54123609
>I can't into functional programming
>therefore it's useless
>>54124364
I have to post a photo for an OP. Why not use one of a sexy girl?
>>54124408
It's useless to post this picture
>>54124556
https://data.desustorage.org/gif/image/1456/01/1456019673911.gif
>>54124596
Donno, the pussy has a bush
>>54124596
She has a huge bush to cover it up, so who knows
Anyone has link to one of her anal prolapse vids?
>>54124608
>>54124615
>bush
Ewwwwww.... What is this, the fucking seventies?
>>54124624
>hurr wuminz have hairs, i'm scared
>>54124615
>her anal prolapse vids?
Dont think she has one of those. She barely started doing anal a few months ago. She's still taking only one cock up there
>>54123576
>>54124250
She's very ugly and I hate her face but she looks very good in these two cherrypicked pictures.
>>54124634
IKR? Better stick to sweet silky traps
>>54123840
Yea, Oracle added lambda expressions to Java for the funding. Yea.
>>54124657
Faggot
>>54124667
Meh, she's not exceptionally pretty nor hot. Still would fuck until my dick falls off, tho
>>54124641
>She barely started doing anal a few months ago
lolwut, she has done anal for at least a year and a half
She even has some anal fisting vids.
>>54124634
>what are raizors
>>54124681
geee I wonder what gave it away
>>54124684
>what are raizors
i meant. there's nothing wrong with some hair
>>54124667
Her teeth are too big and her mouth is weird
>>54124684
>She even has some anal fisting vids.
WTF? Seriously? How have I not been informed about this...
>>54124712
you what?
>>54124624
be honest anon, sometimes a bit of bush is good.
>>54124712
>riley riley why have you got such open teeth and mouth
>all the more to deepthroat you cock better, little redhead
>>54124596
she got a bush so you can't see her pussy warts
>>54124723
It should be exclusively bald. Sex with someone who doesn't shave everything off down there itches.
And imagine eating out a huge bush...
>>54124755
permavirgin
>>54124789
Oh wow, you sure told me with that snappy comeback.
>>54124810
underaged permavirgin >>>/reddit/
>>54124755
>Sex with someone who doesn't shave everything off down there itches.
ROFL
>>54124713
you got baited son
I follow her stuff pretty closely and she doesn't do that
>current year
>not shaving
Protip: if she doesn't shave, she has something to hide (warts or herpes)
Shaved is pleb tier.
>>54124712
>severe autism
>>54124857
http://c1.nuttit.com/Cache/GetImage?id=wrCMImA.jpg
>>54124755
>Sex with someone who doesn't shave everything off down there itches.
every tried licking a snatch that was shaved a couple of days prior?
you might as well have oral sex with a sheet of sandpaper.
>>54124895
top kek
If she didn't get wet, then I have bad news for you anon....
>>54124891
>I got so disentisized by porn I can't tell a pussy from an ass
>>54124895
>every tried licking a snatch
obviously no
>>54124909
wut? I thought we were talking about whether or not she does fisting?
>>54124909
A hole is a hole
>>54124926
>anal fisting vids
Follow the comment train
>>54124908
>If she didn't get wet, then I have bad news for you anon....
her name was sandy anon.
>>54124895
>she doesn't get wet
>must be because she shaves
lol
>>54124895
You're supposed to lick the clitoris, not the hair stubs. WTF?
>>54124980
>You're supposed to lick the clitoris, not the hair stubs. WTF?
redditor virgin detected
>>54123576
because F# is better
>>54125002
you're offtopic
>>54124980
No, you're supposed to lick around the vagina. If she has hair, you suck on the hair. If she shaves, you have to lick the stubs which feels like sandpaper.
>>54125002
>he still thinks we're discussing languages
Oh god OP, look at what you've done...
>>54124126
>>>/reddit/
>>54123576
I already learned Haskell, why should I bother with OCaml? It's just a more primitive functional language with added OOP (yuck!)
>>54125074
>haskell doesn't have oop
look at this faggot
This is what happens when you post your ratchet 3DPD waifus
>masturbating to porn stars that did nigger porn
i thought i was on /g/ not /tv/
>>54125074
haskell and ocaml are used by hairy sjw feminists.
>>54124641
>She barely started doing anal a few months ago
I love modern porn. Always pushing these new starlets to do new and more extreme stuff in order to stay relevant and popular. It's not like in the old days, where you had a few porn stars and they had their own niches. Now, even 18 year old first timers do anal and ass to mouth deep throating and other degrading stuff.
I love it.
>>54125089
Please tell me where Haskell has OOP-style inheritance, polymorphism and methods.
>>54125195
Yea, it's pretty great.
>>54125197
this.
it can emulate it, but it's not built into the lang
>>54125002
Call me when F# has a non-shit module system, let alone such a ridiculously good one like ocaml's.
>>54125197
http://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0509027
You should probably learn more about your favourite language before spouting bullshit on /g/
>>54125195
>ass to mouth
hardly anything exciting
>>54125232
For us that grew up with porn in the 80s, it is.
>>54125229
>type classes are the same as oop classes
try again
From OCaml to anal fisting in less than 20 posts.
Nice, /g/
>>54125232
there's so much of it and eveyones doing anal etc that its all boring.
straight fucking looks good now compared to all that shit.
>>54125256
>oop classes
Do you realize how nonsensical this is? There is no such thing as "oop classes" and "non-oop classes".
>>54125264
>From OCaml to anal fisting in less than 20 posts.
come on /g/ this is just poor.
lets make it less than 10.
>>54125229
Those do not implement OOP-style inheritance, polymorphism and methods.
>You should probably learn more about your favourite language before spouting bullshit on /g/
I've been programming in the language for 6 years, having worked on GHC and helped design and implement new language extensions I'm very confident in my mastery of the language.
Don't need some condescending-sounding cuck on /g/ to throw around buzzwords in an attempt to redefine established terminology.
>>54125284
>Needs more speed, Scotty
>'m 'iving her all she's got 'aptain
>>54125274
classes which define behavior with some functions and isn't tied to specific data is the same as classes that is tied to a specific data and has custom methods
>>54125284
Well, /g/ managed to throw in an antisemitic post after just three posts, and the first nigger cock reference came after four posts.
Not too shabby
>>54125291
>I've been programming in the language for 6 years, having worked on GHC and helped design and implement new language extensions I'm very confident in my mastery of the language.
Has not seen a vagina, shaved or hairy.
>>54125291
Also,
>that paper
They're basically demonstrating that you can embed a reinvention of OOP inside Haskell's rich type system, which is about as surprising as saying that you can write a JavaScript interpreter in C.
>>54125304
I meant to meme arrow the statement
>>54124723
Plz swap they're faces please
>>54125291
>OOP-style inheritance, polymorphism and methods.
There is no such thing as "OOP-style" X. Java isn't true OOP, so drop the Java references.
If you want true OOP look at Objective-C and Smalltalk.
>>54125317
>>>/Reddit/
>>54125291
>I'm very confident in my mastery of the language.
Dear lord, I picture your latex coat, fedora and walking cane already
>>54125323
done
>>54125358
why are you on /g/
shouldn't you be on Reddit discussing traps?
>>54125361
Thank you, you have done an excellent job
>>54123576
Because even less people use it than lisp.
>>54125369
>getting this upset
>>54125341
>If you want true OOP look at Objective-C and Smalltalk.
I'm familiar with those languages. Those are what I was basing my argument off, since I figured you were in the group of pretentious people who dismiss Java as “not real OOP” since it doesn't work like Smalltalk.
(Incidentally, you forgot to list JavaScript)
>>54125389
Significantly more, rather. It's all over the financial sector, it powers the most popular unikernel (mirageOS), it's everywhere in parsers. Rust, hack, haxe, they all used ocaml.
Every fucking Haskell fag on this shitty forum for mongolean cave paintings are bragging about how you can implement OOP using Haskell's functional features, and now you're saying that you can't?
Why are Haskellfags so shifty?
>>54125410
See >>54125319
You are confusing the “Haskell is not object-oriented” argument with a hypothetical “Haskell cannot imitate OOP-style behavior” non-argument that nobody made.
>>54125410
>every X has claimed Y dude, just believe me, pls, I need to have the last word
>>54125397
>Those are what I was basing my argument off
Funny, since Objective-C don't have "OOP style inheritance" aka class inheritance and it doesn't even have "OOP style classes" but this >>54125304
>classes which define behavior with some functions and isn't tied to specific data
So obviously you don't know shit about anything.
>javascript
JavaScript is Scheme with C syntax.
>>54125451
I'm not him, faggot
I admit, I don't give a shit about OOP, and I know barely about it, but it's till shit because I've hear it before in dpt threada
>>54124408
It's not /g/ themed because a pic of a pornographic actress should be in /s/ [even though it contains no nudity]. It would be complete shit but /g/ related to post HOUSEFIRES LOL 111 i.e. GTX 480 [Fermi]. Picture related. The current housefire that can't OC for shit. R9 390X. Stupid cooler is as much fail as stock Intel coolers in unlocked K processors.
>>54125477
>I admit, I don't give a shit about OOP, and I know barely about it, but it's till shit because I've hear it before in dpt threada
Why do I even go to this board anymore....
>>54125506
>pretending
we're arguing against / for talking points about aspects of languages, not superiority
>>>/reddit/
>>54125551
so basically it's like debating hairy v shaved then
>>54125573
No, because Haskell is objectively better.
>>54125561
he's a faggot, I agree
still, I was referring to OOP talks
>>54125584
but I heard laziness was a failure and that fp is bloat
>>54125451
>Funny, since Objective-C don't have "OOP style inheritance" aka class inheritance
Of course it does. Don't be silly. Objective C has inheritance of behaviors and methods just like all object oriented languages.
>>54125304 was not me.
>JavaScript is Scheme with C syntax.
Yes, and it's also a perfectly fine example of an object-oriented language, based on message-passing and prototype inheritance.
>>54123576
Already tried F#, it was cool, but it turns out type systems are a bit of a drag on proper scaling development in data-driven applications.
Picked Clojure and I'm basically not looking back. What a blissful language for actually making things that work.
>>54125624
>but it turns out type systems are a bit of a drag on proper scaling development in data-driven applications.
Yeah, I really prefer the clearly superior “crashing at runtime” model of dealing with bugs. It scales fantastically!
>>54125613
>Of course it does. Don't be silly. Objective C has inheritance of behaviors and methods just like all object oriented languages.
Yes, but not like you think. It doesn't have classes, but interfaces. Data is not tied up to interfaces like they are to C++/Java style classes.
Hence "oop classes" is nonsensical, that's just the way Java and C++ implements it.
>Yes, and it's also a perfectly fine example of an object-oriented language, based on message-passing and prototype inheritance.
And prototype inheritance is how you would do it in Haskell as well, and is very different from how you accomplish inheritance in ObjC, Simula, C++, Java etc.
>>54125584
>No, because Haskell is objectively better.
ITT, we discuss why kikes prefer haskell
>>54125613
>based on message-passing
You don't do message passing in JavaScript, you access members directly. There is no message primitive, like there is in Objective-C and Smalltalk.
>>54125632
Easy solutions in Clojure. Either use core.typed to annotate before deployment; declare record schemas; or just use a function to check the schema of any map you get from the DB from a certain table. Not hard.
>>54125635
>It doesn't have classes, but interfaces.
These are effectively the same thing, although classes are a bit less powerful in that you need more helpers classes to accomplish the same goals (think FactoryFactories).
>Hence "oop classes" is nonsensical, that's just the way Java and C++ implements it.
I deliberately avoided this term. See >>54125197
>>54125656
>You don't do message passing in JavaScript, you access members directly.
It's important to distinguish between terminology (i.e. what JavaScript calls it) and the underlying mechanism (i.e. how the compiler actually implements it) here, I think.
The functional distinction between message passing and direct member access is what happens when you try to access a method that does not exist.
In a message passing model, you get code that compiles, but which will fail at runtime, at the time of attempting the method access. Implementation-wise, there is usually some sort of internal table of exported methods that needs to be consulted at runtime.
In a direct access regime with fixed interfaces, the compiler knows effectively at compile time how to invoke the relevant method. In terms of implementation, you can either (in simple cases) directly jump into the implementation code, or (in less simple cases) jump through a fixed offset / virtual function call table.
This is the most important distinction, and JavaScript definitely falls into the former category, along with other high-level “dynamic languages” that run slow as shit.
>>54125683
In any case, it's apparent that what you think is OOP is not actually related to OOP theory but rather C++/Java style OOP. FactoryFactories, for example, has nothing to do with OOP theory.
Therefore this discussion is no longer interesting. I would suggest looking at Objective-C or Smalltalk (instead of pretending you already did).
>>54125717
Forgot to mention, for a direct access model this means that the compiler has no choice but to reject code that accesses an unknown method - perhaps at JIT compile time - but there's no way around it since it can't possibly pick the right offset to jump into.
(Although note that it could, in principle, statically compile the relevant lines of code into code that will produce an error)
>>54125731
>In any case, it's apparent that what you think is OOP is not actually related to OOP theory but rather C++/Java style OOP.
Is this the point where you're going to throw some hipster definition of ‘OOP’ on the table and try and pretend it's more relevant than the concepts broadly agreed upon by the industry and academic body as a whole?
The key concepts I mentioned are the same no matter what interpretation you choose to look at; and Haskell exhibits none of them, which is what this argument was originally about.
That's true no matter how you choose to redefine the terms, until you redefine the terms enough to make Haskell OOP - but then every other “object oriented language” in existence is no longer object oriented.
Although if you truly want to understand what the meaning of “Haskell is not object-oriented” is, the best way to do so would be to learn Haskell and OCaml or F# and understand what distinguishes those languages. It's very hard to ignore.
>>54125762
>Is this the point where you're going to throw some hipster definition of ‘OOP’ on the table and try and pretend it's more relevant than the concepts broadly agreed upon by the industry and academic body as a whole?
There are no "industry and academic standard" for OOP you flaming faggot. An OOP language is something that have some (but not necessarily all) of the features in :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming#Features
And by that definition, Haskell definitively can be OOP.
>>54125860
>And by that definition, Haskell definitively can be OOP.
There's no “can be” in a language. A language either is, or isn't something.
Once you get to the point of arguing that something “can be” OOP, you're failing to see the distinction between a language *being* something and a language *implementing* something.
Again, we all agree upon the fact that you can embed an object oriented language in Haskell's type system. Ergo, Haskell is strictly more powerful than object oriented languages. In fact, Haskell is strictly more powerful than the vast, vast majority of programming languages in existence.
But that does not make Haskell object-oriented, in the same way C is not JavaScript even though you can write a JavaScript interpreter in C and use it to get JavaScript-like semantics in C.
>>54123609
Ocaml is used by Jane Street. Suck one bro.
>>54123609
Kids these days. Go out there and find a real job, son.
>>54123609
So you consider it of great practical use, then?
Without academia, you wouldn't even have fucking java to write your insignificant userland trash in.
I fucking swear, "software engineers" are far smugger than they should be. If userland development halted in the 90s nobody would give a fuck. Not much has changed except for graphical effects and increased resource use, largely due to the cost of caching and processing those effects.
Because I'm not nerd
