implicit-hie VS hoogle

If you see an error message that tells you an implicit cradle could not be found for your file, then it may be helpful to generate and edit that hie.yaml file. If you have any issues with the generated config, don't hesitate to open an issue on the Implicit-hie repo. Best of luck

Dimensions behave somewhat like a "type system" for math. These dimensional-analysis tricks act like the trick you see in Haskell sometimes, where you can easily guess an implementation of an expression once you know it's type (or e.g. search by type signature https://hoogle.haskell.org/ )

Ideally like this: https://zio.dev/reference/#concurrency

Or this: https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=fork

{ "customLocalFormatters.formatters": [ { "command": "make format", "languages": ["haskell"] } ], "emeraldwalk.runonsave": { "commands": [ { "match": "*.hs", "isAsync": true, "cmd": "make retag retag_file=${file}" } ] }, "ghcid.command": "make ghcid", "goto-documentation.customDocs": { "hs": "https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=${query}" } }

You had a look at Hoogle?

https://hoogle.haskell.org/

For some type signatures there is (are) only one (or only a few) meaningful implementation(s).

I'm in the middle on operators. I like being able to define my own, but I understand how it's challenging to figure out what the hieroglyphics mean when you're not familiar with them. https://hoogle.haskell.org/ can be a help here

> In something like Haskell I need to know upfront what I may do with some "object". The IDE can't help me discover the methods I need. All it can do is to show me all available functions in scope.

Sorry, but this just isn't true. Hoogle <https://hoogle.haskell.org/> searches function by type, fuzzily: ask for functions whose first parameter is the type of the object-like thing, and you'll get just what you're looking for. And it's perfectly possible to run hoogle locally and integrate it with your editor.

Now, the tooling for a language like Java have had several centuries more of aggregate development work done on them compared to Haskell's tools, and if that polish is a difference-maker for you, that's fine! But it's not a fundamental limitation, and claiming it is is just fud.

In my perusals into the Haskell ecosystem, discovering Hoogle[1] was definitely a revelation on the power of a strongly-typed language. Sometimes, you know the _shape_ of the thing you are looking for, but not the name. The ability to search a repository of packages for all functions conforming to a certain type signature (e.g., (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> [a]) is a superpower.

[1] https://hoogle.haskell.org/

which is quite a bit more readable. You can even search Hoogle for x -> HashMap x y -> y and find it, try it!

https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=x%20-%3E%20HashMap%20x%20...

Haskell has hoogle, which searches Hackage for functions matching names, type signatures, etc.

Hello, I am wondering if there is something like https://hoogle.haskell.org for the rust language.