Post 463150 by espectalll@mstdn.io
 (DIR) More posts by espectalll@mstdn.io
 (DIR) Post #463003 by espectalll@mstdn.io
       2018-10-10T11:44:37Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Probably my main issue with Haskell (besides its learning curve) is how obscure and cryptic error messages can get. I found a small PDF for that, seems to be neat: http://ics.p.lodz.pl/~stolarek/_media/pl:research:stolarek_understanding_basic_haskell_error_messages.pdf
       
 (DIR) Post #463022 by espectalll@mstdn.io
       2018-10-10T11:45:27Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       On the other hand you have Rust, which feels like it must have some sort of AI on its compiler.
       
 (DIR) Post #463150 by espectalll@mstdn.io
       2018-10-10T11:56:32Z
       
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       tbh Rust seems to be mostly a better, imperative alternative - it's more familiar, programs pretty much always perform better (there's even lazy evaluation lol), with far more help, far better documented, with a more active ecosystem and constantly evolving without breaking backwards... but I can't help but think how neat Haskell's purity and simplicity is x3
       
 (DIR) Post #464424 by rushsteve1@mstdn.io
       2018-10-10T13:40:31Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @espectalll I love Rust, but it is far from a simple language. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter of opinion.Minimalism is C's biggest strength. There isn't a whole lot going on in the language itself, so it's fairly easy to learn and use.
       
 (DIR) Post #464555 by espectalll@mstdn.io
       2018-10-10T13:50:46Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @rushsteve1 Yeah, sadly it seems like simplicity had to be traded off in exchange of what Rust has to offer, largely because of memory safety. But it seems worth it.