eckza

It is, if you know where to look.

Therein lies the problem. The language doesn't have much marketshare, and few champions.

I just finished reading Scott Wlaschin's Domain Driven Design for Functional Programmers and it's an incredible, batteries-included guide that goes from "hello world" to "and here's how you use it in an organization" in a few hundred pages.

I wish I had been exposed to it about a decade ago. Incredibly easy to follow and well-explained.

FP Or Die Gang is downvoting you, but this is actually correct.

No referential transparency (among other things, no doubt) makes this a harder problem to solve than just using a language that supports it.

$0.02

I'm fascinated with this.

What's your use case, here? What problems do you expect to solve for someone that chose to adopt this?

Are y'all scratching a very particular itch, and open-sourcing the outcome? Or is this more of an academic / POC thing, to see what it looks like to build a COBOL to dotnet transpiler?

That's just not true.

Moving faster does not mean moving more effectively. Frantic activity should not be mistaken for progress.

I'm OK with the FAA taking "days to resolve the problem" if it means that nobody dies.

For what it's worth, my team and I are partial to "move carefully, and tend things".

Very. My fsharp experience is fairly limited, but I am having no trouble following along.

I have to agree!

I'm only about a third of the way through; I didn't realize that there was so much about properly building OO systems that I'd simply never seen in the wild, or heard of before.

You'll be impressed, I think. It feels very natural - at least, it does to me.

It's a solid book. I was chugging through it a bit at a time, until I discovered Scott Wlaschin's Domain Driven Design Made Functional. I've dropped the Evans book (as it's mired in mid-00's Enterprise Java patterns) and am enjoying this one quite a bit more.

Both books are great. Read whichever one aligns with your practice best.

I recommend Wlaschin's book for anyone curious about FP, without hesitation. He's great at explaining things from first principles, without veering off into "monad tutorial" territory.

https://pragprog.com/titles/swdddf/domain-modeling-made-func...

If the type of C is a type D -> E -> F... then you're already there.

Or I'm misunderstanding the question. (In which case, please, somebody correct me.)

But if I'm not... Elm, Haskell, F#, and probably most other FP langs support this.

I buy all of my domains from Namecheap. I'm not 100% how TLDs work or who owns them or whatever... but just to be safe, I bought another 8 years of my .dev email address. Fortunately, the renewal rate was something like $17/yr. Jusr posting this in case anyone else is concerned about renewal prices on Namecheap; they appear to be stable, and you can still buy .dev domains from them.

After shipping several production applications in Elm over the last five years... I can confirm that the development experience is an absolute joy.

With a compiler this helpful, and sub-second builds-on-save - you get really tight feedback loops.

I can't say enough good of it.

On some level I agree; however, this article in particular is not a collection of virtue signals.

If I have failed to see how this is not the case, I would appreciate some examples.

`git pull origin main`

What about the rest of this, that you didn't quote, do you take issue with?

Inexperienced developers that don't understand what they're doing, armed with a language known best for being worst-in-class at everything except for "running everywhere", is a recipe for disaster, no matter how you spin it.

It feels egregious to implicate "the entire surface area of functional programming" here, when there are other obvious issues at play.

It's gonna be super fun for absolutely nobody but the hecklers when he finds out about Lacan.

I'm not sure what kind of life you've lived, or how old you are; but stating that

> Adults aren't more sophisticated than a teenager, they just have better impulse control

is reductionist and absurd.

Some experiences are only available to adulthood. Some experiences take decades to transpire; some experiences need decades to pass after their conclusion before they can be fully understood, contextualized, and woven into one's self.

Not all of us want to live within 15 walking minutes of _anywhere_.

What’s fascinating to me is that this discourse has the tone and pacing of literally any HN conversation.

Take from that what you will.

Tail-caw optimized.

Alternative proposal: for the love of God, please stop trying to quantify this.

If your engineers truly aren't getting shit done, you should be able to tell without looking at their code.

We don't get paid to write code. We get paid to _think_; it's just that if we don't write code afterwards, we get fired.

If you see this, and you like it: Elm's HTML DSL is similar, and really nice.

Every HTML tag (except for `text`) is an implementation of the base function `node`, which is:

    node : String -> List Attr msg -> List Html msg -> Html msg

So in the base library, the `p` tag is implemented as

    p : List Attr msg -> List Html msg -> Html msg
    p = node "p"

Which means that in Elm, the above content would look like this:

    p [] [ text "Hello ", b [] [ text "World" ] ]

i.e., every HTML tag can accept as parameters:

    - A list of attributes
    - A list of child tags

I've found it to be very elegant to work with; and with a good auto-formatter, it's really easy to build complicated HTML without losing your place and dropping a closing tag.

Another upside is that if you use a less-common language, there is _not_ a library or package for everything just yet... so sometimes, that creates the opportunity to work on open source at your day job!

Some people will say that this is a downside, because you can't build new things or ship new features as quickly… But I suppose that it comes down to what you want to get out of your career, and what your goals are.

If you are careful and diligent, you can find a way to get paid to solve problems within the domain of your interests. It might take a few years of study on your own time, but I pulled it off; and if I can pull it off, that means that just about anybody can!

Plus, learning new stuff is fun, and I would not have spent the time that I did learning the things that I have learned, if I didn't feel like it was worth it for its own sake.

Learn a statically-typed FP lang and get a job doing that.

Even if you end up at a "Simple Haskell" place, you'll still have all sorts of opportunities to reinvent the wheel (so that you can run yourself over with it, of course).

Forgive the question, but why is exercise such a distant next step for you?

You very clearly have a lot of self-discipline, and you have your shit together. For me, exercise has always been the most rewarding part of the whole deal.

Really glad that you took the time to make the effort over literal years to find what works for your body. For most people - myself included - that's what it takes.

And most people won't stick with it and see it through.

> Why deny his experience, though?

Because it was an option.

He treated it like poverty tourism, like a middle-class youth group "missions trip" to build huts for third-world natives.

Good on him for having an epiphany, but I'd wager that he'd have a different perspective if he had to do that job long past his soft-handed tendonitis episode in order to feed his family that he barely mentioned in his interview.

Imagine having built so small of a life for yourself and your family that in order to get a reality check, you have to check yourself in to rehab with the "common folk" in order to rescue yourself from your "depression".

It's lamentable, not commendable. It has all happened before, and it will happen again.

This is not a salvation story; it is a cautionary tale. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Counterpoint: it's okay to set expectations for how you'd like to be interacted with, by your team members.

We've always been at war with Eastaisa.

Marshall McLuhan's _Understanding Media: The Extensions Of Man_ continues to provide critical insight.

What is so fascinating about this? The Internet hasn't been a meritocracy since sometime around the turn of the millennium.