Me, trying a new programming language: Wow, this is great! I wish all software was written in it so that it has a healthy ecosystem!

Me, one or two years later: Ugh, that language has major downsides, is a pain to use and now I'm stuck with software written in it. Why was I ever enthusiastic about it?

Somehow I always end up going back to Perl and C, old and ugly languages that don't let me down.

@wolf480pl @ayo I wonder: does Haskell count as boring?

It's several decades old, but is only recently having it's influence on more popular languages like Python. Probably via Rust.

@alcinnz @wolf480pl @ayo Rust is more influenced by the ML family. It was originally implemented in OCaml.
Which is another good candidate for a boring language that doesn't suck as much as C. (which sucks a lot without a bunch of tooling)

@grainloom @alcinnz @ayo
OCaml is definitely the most boring of functional languages. So if a functional language can be boring at all, OCaml is one of them.

@wolf480pl @grainloom @alcinnz If I had to come up with a criteria for "boring" in this context, it would come down to: Ubuiqitous, well-understood and very stable in both the language and the ecosystem.

I'd say the most boring functional language would be one of the Lisp dialects.

(Of course, a language can also be "boring" in the sense of not taking on any novel ideas, but that's probably a different topic)

@ayo @wolf480pl @grainloom Fair enough. In which case, functional programming is not that boring because it's not ubiquitous. Though yes Lisps could qualify.

I was kind of thinking in terms of novelty, and wondering at which point does the novelty wear off?

@alcinnz @ayo @wolf480pl @grainloom
I think a boring programming language is a language that:
- has very clear and distinct concepts (and not too many of them)
- a well maintained set of libraries and an easy way to install them in different versions
- does not hit you in the face with NullPointerExceptions and segfaults
- when it compiles it runs

#Rust is such a language for me.

@janriemer

If you like "very clear and distinct concepts (and not too many of them)", Haskell has even fewer without feeling limiting! And it hits your other points quite well too.

Whilst having had decades to stabalize. The only problem is mainstream programming shuns functional programming...

And when the poorly documented GHC language extensions get brought up, which I find largely irrelevant.

@ayo @wolf480pl @grainloom

@alcinnz @janriemer @ayo @grainloom
-XFlexibleInstances -XMultiParamTypeClasses -XFunctionalDependencies -XTypeFamilies -XFlexibleContexts -XTemplateHaskell -XQuasiQuotes -XTypeApplications -XScopedTypeVariables -XViewPatterns -XLambdaCase

Haskell is fun.
Overengineering stuff in Haskell is even more fun.
Definitely not boring.

Follow

@alcinnz well ok, -XViewPatterns, -XLambdaCase, -XQuasiQuotes and -XTemplateHaskell are kinda bloat.

But the other ones are usefull all the time...

· · Web · 1 · 1 · 0
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!