Hacker News Reader

What is up with Haskellers starting these irrelevant Lisp vs Haskell arguments? OP made no mention or implication that Lisp is better than Haskell. It's petty and counterproductive.

View on HN

This isn't a Lisp versus Haskell argument. It's a matter of fact that the expressiveness of Haskell's (and others') type systems are more expressive than Lisp's, practically (and almost theoretically).

Also, I'm not a "Haskeller". I do program in Haskell occasionally, though. I'm actually, at this time, a professional Common Lisp programmer.

And how is that relevant to the OP? The OP made no counterclaim.

It is relevant to the discussion as an example.

My bringing up of Haskell and friends wasn't there to counter, but to merely observe that there are better things surrounding type systems than what is provided by even Lisp. And I wished to add that if one is to look for inspiration on building expressive type systems, then Haskell should be the place to look, not Lisp.

I also wanted to provide Haskell as a kind of system which provides an inference engine that is much stronger than Lisp's. I don't want anyone to get the idea that Lisp implementations' inference engines is even commensurable to what exists elsewhere.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com