/fpg/: functional programming general
- Home
- Board: /g/ - Technology
- Reading: /fpg/: functional programming general
Moot Google+ Appreciation Edition
Last thread: >>53841487
Resources:
- https://storify.com/realtalktech
- https://twitter.com/realtalkintech
Latest articles:
- https://storify.com/realtalktech/how-to-be-a-good-haskell-programmer
- https://storify.com/realtalktech/taking-down-haskell
- https://storify.com/realtalktech/haskell-has-no-benefits-is-good-for-nothing
- https://storify.com/realtalktech/why-functional-programming-sucks
IRC: #/g/fpg on Rizon
>>53858503
Should I learn Clojure? If not then what should I learn
what has trump to do with fp?
What's the consensus on Racket for small software development? It would be my first Lisp. I'm mainly attracted to it above other dialects due to all the highly maintained easy to use libraries, and I know fuck all about writing my own bindings, and I'd rather not struggle for hours to get some bullshit that hasn't been updated in a decade to work right.
But I've heard its primary use is just developing scripting languages. Should I use it, or just go with CL?
>>53859924
He'll make it great again
I want to give a tuple to a binary operator in F# for using in a map. I can use the (||>) operator to get value, but (||>) is('a * 'b) -> ('a -> 'b -> 'c) ->'c. What I want is a operator that takes the binary operator and turn it into a tuple based function, something like('a -> 'b -> 'c) -> ('a * 'b -> 'c). Is there something like that built-in?
>>53859916
a proper lisp like scheme or common lisp
>>53861260
so you want n function that will uncurry a function? I don't think there is anything built in, but it should be trivial to write yourself.
>>53859998
Racket is pretty good, even John Carmack uses it.
>>53859998
Racket is an affront to the Algol/Scheme philosophy.
>>53860064
but fp was never great in the first place.
bump
