Hacker News Reader

All high-level languages with optimising compilers have "non-compositional performance" as you say. The big issue with laziness is reasoning about space usage. A strict language is not immune to this however. If one builds lazy abstractions (e.g. Streams, collection views) in Scala, then one has the same problems.

View on HN

> If one builds lazy abstractions (e.g. Streams, collection views) in Scala, then one has the same problems.

Sure. There's nothing to stop you using lazy values in a strict language if you want to; it's just that you get the option of using strict values as well. Whereas in Haskell you have no way of building strict constructions other than some ad-hoc annotations.

There is the -XStrict language pragma that makes everything strict.

Hmm, interesting. Is it actually a viable language for working in? (Lack of an IDE would still be an issue, as would the limitations of the record system, but I'd certainly be more interested in Haskell if strict was a first-class way of working there).

You can check the Ghcide and the (early work in progress but very usable) haskell-language-server projects.

They implement the language server protocol and add ide-like functionality for Haskell to any editor that support the protocol like vscode.

I totally agree that the records system is annoying.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com