Hacker News Reader

Comment by pjmlp | Hacker News Reader

I surely known, lots of people with more credentials in the field than any of us.

By the way, type classes are somehow related to OOP, maybe you should listen to a guy called Simon Peyton Jones on Haskell influences.

To save you some searching effort, https://www.slideshare.net/nushio/peyton-jones2011type-class...

I would advise to watch the talk that goes with the slides.

View on HN

type classes ARE interfaces and they ARE categories. You can say the the programming methodology is influenced from OOP using this concept. But as a taxonomy the naming is improper. Categories is the most rigorously defined vocabulary for this concept. The term becomes inconistently taxonomied when coupled with OOP. It's historical baggage because Categories/Interfaces essentially were popularized by OOP.

OOP is not formally agreed upon in academia there is no consensus. So your reliance on academia here is flawed. Use your own brain rather then blindly trusting others. You know about the replication crisis right? Science is found to be wrong over 50% of the time especially in fields like psychology. Don't be blind.

I have found the person that knows more than the language authors themselves.

Please elucidate the crowd on the academic value of your research to computing progress.

The language authors agree with me. Your slides don't prove anything, it's just explaining the relationship not the origin. I'm not pulling this out of my ass. Your comment is also just fucking rude. Please stop.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com