Arc Forumnew | comments | leaders | submitlogin
2 points by akkartik 4706 days ago | link | parent

"Social norms, idioms, what the language encourages/discourages matter just as much if not more so than the language features themself."

That reminded me of Steve Yegge's liberal/conservative spectrum: http://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts/KaSKeg4vQ...; http://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts/iuRbQe6Eo...

Haskell's been trying to make types optional, which will be interesting to watch. Because even if they loosen their type system their social norms are pretty baked at this point.



2 points by rocketnia 4704 days ago | link

"Haskell's been trying to make types optional"

Do you have a link for that? I had the impression Haskell already did a pretty good job of supporting untyped code within a module, but if it has something to do with explicit passing of type class instances or untyped module exports, that's pretty interesting. Gradual types would be even more interesting than that.

-----

2 points by akkartik 4704 days ago | link

Sorry, I was referring merely to http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.6.1/html/users_guide/defer... (via http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.6.1/html/users_guide/relea...). Not so much the implicit/explicit spectrum as the dynamic/static.

-----

1 point by rocketnia 4703 days ago | link

Well, that's interesting too. :-p

-----