|
|
|
|
|
by scrumper
1307 days ago
|
|
And a very patient and curious evaluator you were too (I was one of your counterparts at DA). > The way daml is setup makes it more of a weird sibling of GRPC for stateful resource protocols. Yes, well said. I think that's quite fair. It's wrong to look at it through the lens of Haskell (or any other FP language), it's really a declarative language for describing process flow and actor rights and obligations. Not something you could write a complete program in. A better way to think of it is as a big DSL for controlling state machines; you still need all the machinery around the outside to advance execution, handle IO, trigger events and transitions etc. It's syntactically similar to Haskell because the people who created it were Haskell heads out of ETH Zürich. That's the only connection. |
|
I’m not sure if I was the most patient of evaluators ;). If I was despite that one of the more patient evaluators, wow!
I kinda view everything in this space from the lens of tools I want to build for myself. Namely a decent transactional db system where the modelling language for datatypes and workflows is a linear logical concurrent functional language with some soundness guarantees. I did build a preliminary version of the core of that at jpmorgan, though for various reasons it never saw the light of day