Clojurians Log v2

Morning

Good Morning!

👋

Mornin

moaning

mogge

Mornin'

morning

👋

whoa

okay, won't recommend that book in future then

what an arsehole

well... yeah

kinda

that's what i mean

i think it would be very hard to argue that spec is more simple than monads for ex

and given the selector stuff is going in the direction of lenses too 🤷

"One day I will find the right words, and they will be simple."

the quest continues

o/

To be fair, it is a good book. But Julie Moronuki has also written a book with a guy called Chris who probably isn't a knob

måning!

what is it about the haskell community, sheesh

to quote lisa simpson, "this is why we can't have nice things"

Well, I wonder if your feeling is essentially because a large part of mathematics essentially boils down to being a rigorous discipline for decomposing things into small pieces and composing them together. Finding the simplest formulation of an idea etc. Therefore anything sufficiently mirroring mathematical formalisms will almost by definition be simple in the sense Rich means. I think spec meets actually meets a similar theoretical standard to monads. Though monads and spec tackle different problems so it’s a bit apples and oranges, and unfair to say monads are simpler (better or more elegant) than spec, because the complexity of the initial problem is different. Still, spec is based on pretty rigorous foundations (parsing with derivatives) which describes how specs can be composed from simple predicate functions. I also think when you’re comparing monads to spec there; you’re actually comparing the trade offs in the implementations rather than the theoretic underpinnings. spec definitely makes a bunch of easy compromises by complecting certain non-theoretical things. For example being able to reuse specs for generative testing, or having a global registry of specs etc, maybe also the syntax being a bit verbose etc.

Morning

yeah that's fair

i guess i've used both and found monads + plumatic schema to be the most natural fit for what i want to do but maybe the crossover between monads + spec isn't quite as clear cut as it feels to me

they feel like they sit enough in the same space that they don't coexist well

whereas schema is hands-off enough to be a natural build on the essential power of homoiconicity for the kinda serialisation/deserialisation/run time validation i wanna do in a composable way :thinking_face:

there are two Chrises in the story, coauthor of the Haskell Book is Chris Allen, Joy of Haskell is co-written with Chris Martin: https://joyofhaskell.com/

Bore da :welsh_flag:

Is it just me or do Clojurians tend to slip the words (Juxtaposition, Complect, Reify) into normal conversations more than the average person?

Yes

Yes it's just me or Yes they do 😄?

not sure about juxtaposition but the other two yes

no other humans say complect

Man, I really need to decomplect my sentences sometimes…

I've started to use "I have to go and grab some hammock time" more frequently when talking with fellow cow-orkers.

we say hammock time a lot on my current (typescript) project, but only cos most of us actually have hammocks haha

I’d like to contribute to this thread by “accretion” of this message.

previously I'd only heard 'accretion' used in connection with Black Holes

Oh, that's a word I'm also using more of "accrete"

I don’t think of monads and spec as being particularly related. The closest I can probably put my finger on is that in a strongly type checked language like Haskell, a monad, or essentially any pattern imposed in types, would prevent you from doing a bunch of things (they’d also imply you can do other things of course). Specs I guess are about you preventing certain shapes of data. Also both are compositional systems,… so perhaps similar in those ways; but ultimately I think very different. I’d say spec is more similar to type systems than to monads (which are in Haskell at least an abstraction expressed as types within that type system). Monads enable a specific type of composition; but I’d say the typed lambda calculus is really the thing providing the compositional similarity between monads and spec that I think you’re highlighting.

my dad always used 'accrete' for bathroom grime

hmmm

as in-sane as a Parisian wild-swimmer