[Haskell-cafe] Poor libraries documentation
Anton van Straaten
anton at appsolutions.com
Wed Jan 30 22:19:32 EST 2008
Derek Elkins wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 02:18 +0000, Neil Mitchell wrote:
>> It isn't something that would throw a C programmer off, but it is
>> something that could confuse a pure Haskell programmer. And the only
>> way I could be sure of radians versus degrees was by trying it out,
>> not a great strategy for determining the implementation of functions!
> Uh, why not? Often that's exactly what I do as checking even
> conveniently located documentation is more time consuming than just
> trying it.
I agree, but at the risk of veering uncharacteristically off-topic for
haskell-cafe, I think it's an interesting example of the degree of
assurance about correctness we're willing to accept in practice, in real
We discover a function called, say, "cos", probably by guessing it's
name, run a very small number of simple tests on it, see the answers we
expect, and decide that it's the function we want. Does anyone want to
defend that on safety/correctness grounds? But some of us do it anyway.
(I'll have to work this into the upcoming paper I mentioned, "In defense
of arbitrary untracked effects in high assurance software." I'm glad
Graham Fawcett volunteered to co-author!)
More information about the Haskell-Cafe