[Haskell-cafe] about Haskell code written to be "too smart"

[Manlio Perillo]

Zachary Turner ha scritto:
> [...]
 > but I do understand that one of the primary uses
> cases and/or motivating factors for using Haskell is when you really 
> just NEED that extra abstraction and power you get from being able to do 
> these types of things.  Someone once said that "simple problems should 
> be simple and difficult problems should be possible".  That doesn't mean 
> the difficult problems become EASY.  One of the best uses for haskell is 
> solving difficult problems.  It's obviously still going to be difficult 
> to solve, and as such the writer (and hence by extension the reader) is 
> going to have to be smart as well. 
> 

I agree with you, and in fact I'm still learning Haskell.
The reason I'm still learning Haskell is because I like its syntax.
And yes, I also like the ability to write efficient function by 
composing other function.

But there is a limit.
In C you have the ability to write assembler code, but one usually think 
twice before doing so, since it will become unreadable to most of the 
people.

If you think that writing low level assembler code is the best solution, 
you should at least document it well, instead of assuming that the 
reader is as smart as you.


As I have written at the begin of the thread, there are people I know 
(*much* more smarter then me), that keep themselves away from Haskell 
because they start to read some code, and they feel something is wrong.

They *think* "ah, the author wrote code in this way just to show how 
smart he is; how can I learn a language if most of the available code is 
written in this way"?

Note the use of the verb "think".
This is only a sensation, and it is wrong; but sensations are important.


 > [...]


Manlio