go forth, my statically typed minions. Eval! Apply!
Joined January 2014
- Tweets267
- Following18
- Followers2.6K
- Likes167
Create a Brobdingnagian monstrosity of 1.2m lines of Haskell. That way, the tooling you create to make working on it tolerable will be practically instant on codebases that don’t need 18 lanes for a 3 point turn.
(With love and appreciation, @mercury)
“Semigroup” and “Monoid” are exclusionary terminology. Prefer “smashy-smashy” and “smashy-smashy-with-extra-nothing”.
It's spooky. It's esoteric. It's also the key to understanding the rise and relevance of functional programming. wired.trib.al/qNfcKv9
This does have the flavour of “an ethical engineer would never write a procedure ‘destroyBaghdad’ - it should take a city as a parameter”
Tired of probabilistic correctness guarantees?
instance Arbitrary UUID where
…
shrink uuid = case UUID.toWords uuid of
(a,b,c,d) -> [UUID.fromWords a' b' c' d' | a' <- sw a, b' <- sw b, c' <- sw c, d' <- sw d]
where sw w = take 10 $ iterate (`div` 2) w
The great thing about using Haskell with LLMs is that you can be absolutely precise about the nonsense you are ingesting and emitting.
@DRMacIver has pointed out that Hypothesis will report all the assertions that fail rather than just the first. A decadent affordance to be avoided by the faithful.
Yes, it will be extremely difficult to follow what's going on as the counterexample-finding algorithm dances between the different assertions. This is by design, and will help you back into the divine light of Writing Correct Code The First Time.
If you nevertheless insist on putting your inadequacies on display with a suite of property tests, at least be sure to prioritise efficiency over interpretability by making a single god-test that verifies everything possible about a function.