this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
583 points (100.0% liked)

196

18171 readers
100 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Solrac@lemmy.world 67 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Finally, someone understands that Allman is not that great, and that Kernighan & Ritchie is the way to go. Also, Haskell, my guy, you good? Lisp, are you ok? Do I need to call your parents?

[–] v_krishna@lemmy.ml 32 points 2 years ago

Do I need to call your parens*

[–] MechanicalJester@lemm.ee 30 points 2 years ago

Allman all the way baybeeee

[–] Phoenix3875@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Meh, it's what you get when you write a language in a different language's "style".

[–] gerryflap@feddit.nl 1 points 2 years ago

I've written Haskell quite a bit, and I don't fully understand why this is called Haskell style. Haskell code looks nothing like this, the syntax is completely different. For Haskell's syntax I think it works fine, because I never noticed something weird. But this code in "Haskell style" looks absolutely insane