castle
hoogle
| castle | hoogle | |
|---|---|---|
| - | 70 | |
| 5 | 800 | |
| - | 0.4% | |
| 0.0 | 8.0 | |
| almost 6 years ago | 4 months ago | |
| Haskell | Haskell | |
| Apache License 2.0 | BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
castle
We haven't tracked posts mentioning castle yet.
Tracking mentions began in Dec 2020.
hoogle
-
Parse, Don't Validate (2019)
Void has zero members.
To be fair I'm not sure why Void was raised as an example in the article, and I've never used it. I didn't turn up any useful-looking implementations on hoogle[1] either.
[1] https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=a+-%3E+Void&scope=set%3As...
-
Back to the future: the story of Squeak, a practical Smalltalk written in itself [pdf]
> There was also a feature that allowed method lookup by putting in the inputs and expected outputs (I still haven't seen anything like this).
Do you mean like hoogle [0]? Or does what you're talking about operate on values rather than type signatures?
[0] https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=a%20-%3E%20a
-
Haskelling My Python
Haskell has it's issues, but this really ain't it. $ is idiomatic all over the place and is greatly more readable then stacking up brackets. The discovery is also very great because you can literally just input it into hoogle: https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=%24 and the first hit is, of course the definition of it. Which includes a full explanation what it does.
-
Why do we need modules at all?
I think Hoogle[1] is proof this concept could work. Haskell has modules, of course, but even if it didn't, Hoogle would keep it still pretty usuable.
The import piece here which is mentioned but not very emphasized in TFA is that Hoogle lets you search by meta data instead of just by name. If a function takes the type I have, and transforms it to the type I want, and the docs say it does what I want, I don't really care what module or package it's from. In fact, that's often how I use Hoogle, finding the function I need across all Stack packages.
That said, while I think it could work, I'm not convinced it'd have any benefit over the statys quo in practice.
[1]: https://hoogle.haskell.org/
-
Rustdoc search; searching functions by type signature
This can be a very useful tool. In the Haskell community there's https://hoogle.haskell.org/ which serves a similar purpose. For me this search engine is indispensable anytime I try to do anything in Haskell.
-
8 months of OCaml after 8 years of Haskell in production
https://hoogle.haskell.org/ can help you find the function that you're looking for.
As for "words"... yes, possibly not the best name. But also so common that everyone that has ever written any Haskell code knows it. Such as Java's System.out.println
- Ask HN: What resources do you recommend for learning Haskell?
- F
- Hoogle: Search Haskell's Docs Based on Type Annotations
- The Hunt for the Missing Data Type
What are some alternatives?
stack - The Haskell Tool Stack
ghci-ng
ghcid - Very low feature GHCi based IDE
happy - The Happy parser generator for Haskell
stgi - A user-centric visual STG implementation to help understand GHC/Haskell's execution model.
fay - A proper subset of Haskell that compiles to JavaScript