| ▲ | vbezhenar 17 hours ago |
| Why Rust? Haskell is gold standard here. |
|
| ▲ | stared 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I guess there is a reason why Linux kernel accepts Rust not Haskell. |
| |
| ▲ | j16sdiz 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Haskell need a runtime environment for memory management. Linux want all memory management explicit. | |
| ▲ | lmm 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Politics. That's all it is. |
|
|
| ▲ | gkfasdfasdf 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Can you elaborate? What is it about Haskell that makes it better? |
| |
| ▲ | vbezhenar 15 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Very advanced type system which allows to move a lot of program correctness to typing system. So basically if your program compiles, it probably works. It's also has GC which makes it better suited for most programs, compared to Rust with its manual memory management. | | |
| ▲ | ModernMech 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | Rust does not have manual memory management, and its type system also has the property that if your program compiles it probably works, IME. |
| |
| ▲ | throw-qqqqq 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Purely functional code is easier to test because of its referential transparency and lack of shared state. Haskell is also nice because of quickcheck. |
|
|
| ▲ | IshKebab 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I would think Lean and other formal languages are the real gold standard. But none of them really have enough training data for LLMs to be any good at them. |
