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

it's probably low effort for a 'mere every day' haskell programmer; it's just a question of what you're familiar with, not actually deep math

(minor correction, as tromp points out, :: is evidently list construction, as in ocaml or haskell, not a type annotation)

you asked what `matchAll primes as list integer with` meant ('what is the second line, a comment?') but apparently the person who answered you didn't understand that you didn't understand. it means 'evaluate the expression `primes`, which should have the type `list integer`, and then attempt to match the value resulting from that evaluation against each of the following expressions in order'

deep math isn't simple to do even when you know what it means; it isn't just a matter of learning what all the symbols mean. this is just a matter of learning what all the symbols mean, like reading english instead of chinese. so to me your complaint reads like someone saying (in chinese) 'just a mere every day reader of novels, it looks like nothing I'm familiar with' because some text is written in english

however, the situation is not quite so symmetric as with chinese and english. with a good notation, cramming lots of symbols onto a line is a really good lever to empower your reasoning ability. consider trying to explain how to play the seventeenth measure of pachelbel's canon in words. or writing assembly instead of c, even though they're both at pretty much the same level of abstraction

pattern-matching really significantly improves the clarity of certain kinds of code, and you're missing out if you don't know what that's like

i'm guessing that #() (the only weird part) is analogous to ${} in `-strings in javascript or #{} in ""-strings in ruby: it embeds an expression to be evaluated in a context where you wouldn't normally expect expression evaluation, in this case a pattern for pattern-matching

(disclaimer, i don't actually know haskell, though i've implemented my own programming language featuring pattern-matching)



Thanks. As a correction, the comment you are directly replying to is the only one that I personally made.

I just happened to agree with the sympathies of the first person and was trying to rephrase things in a more productive and positive manner.

I appreciate the response not only for myself but for others who may be reading it as well. Thank you for taking the time.


i appreciate both the correction and the appreciation


>or writing assembly instead of c, even though they're both at pretty much the same level of abstraction

They aren't.




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

Search: