Based Tsoding
No mom, I’m gonna BE a girl for Christmas. puts on programming socks
That’s 100% how I read it at first.
I don’t think “programmer” fully captures the reality of being an emacs-based programmer.
Hello everyone, and welcome to yet another recreational programming session with who?
You gotta admit though, Haskell is crazy good for parsing and marshaling data
Yes. I’m divided into “hum… 100 lines is larger than I expected” and “what did he mean ‘from scratch’? did he write the parser combinators? if so, 100 lines is crazy small!”
But I’m settling in believing 80 of those lines are verbose type declarations.
I decided to write it myself for fun. I decided that “From Scratch” means:
- No parser libraries (parsec/happy/etc)
- No using
readfrom Prelude - No hacky meta-parsing
Here is what I came up with (using my favourite parsing method: parser combinators):
import Control.Monad ((>=>), replicateM) import Control.Applicative (Alternative (..), asum, optional) import Data.Maybe (fromMaybe) import Data.Functor (($>)) import Data.List (singleton) import Data.Map (Map, fromList) import Data.Bifunctor (first, second) import Data.Char (toLower, chr) newtype Parser i o = Parser { parse :: i -> Maybe (i, o) } deriving (Functor) instance Applicative (Parser i) where pure a = Parser $ \i -> Just (i, a) a <*> b = Parser $ parse a >=> \(i, f) -> second f <$> parse b i instance Alternative (Parser i) where empty = Parser $ const Nothing a <|> b = Parser $ \i -> parse a i <|> parse b i instance Monad (Parser i) where a >>= f = Parser $ parse a >=> \(i, b) -> parse (f b) i instance Semigroup o => Semigroup (Parser i o) where a <> b = (<>) <$> a <*> b instance Monoid o => Monoid (Parser i o) where mempty = pure mempty type SParser = Parser String charIf :: (a -> Bool) -> Parser [a] a charIf cond = Parser $ \i -> case i of (x:xs) | cond x -> Just (xs, x) _ -> Nothing char :: Eq a => a -> Parser [a] a char c = charIf (== c) one :: Parser i a -> Parser i [a] one = fmap singleton str :: Eq a => [a] -> Parser [a] [a] str = mapM char sepBy :: Parser i a -> Parser i b -> Parser i [a] sepBy a b = (one a <> many (b *> a)) <|> mempty data Decimal = Decimal { mantissa :: Integer, exponent :: Int } deriving Show data JSON = Object (Map String JSON) | Array [JSON] | Bool Bool | Number Decimal | String String | Null deriving Show whitespace :: SParser String whitespace = many $ asum $ map char [' ', '\t', '\r', '\n'] digit :: Int -> SParser Int digit base = asum $ take base [asum [char c, char (toLower c)] $> n | (c, n) <- zip (['0'..'9'] <> ['A'..'Z']) [0..]] collectDigits :: Int -> [Int] -> Integer collectDigits base = foldl (\acc x -> acc * fromIntegral base + fromIntegral x) 0 unsignedInteger :: SParser Integer unsignedInteger = collectDigits 10 <$> some (digit 10) integer :: SParser Integer integer = asum [char '-' $> (-1), char '+' $> 1, str "" $> 1] >>= \sign -> (sign *) <$> unsignedInteger -- This is the ceil of the log10 and also very inefficient log10 :: Integer -> Int log10 n | n < 1 = 0 | otherwise = 1 + log10 (n `div` 10) jsonNumber :: SParser Decimal jsonNumber = do whole <- integer fraction <- fromMaybe 0 <$> optional (str "." *> unsignedInteger) e <- fromIntegral . fromMaybe 0 <$> optional ((str "E" <|> str "e") *> integer) pure $ Decimal (whole * 10^log10 fraction + signum whole * fraction) (e - log10 fraction) escapeChar :: SParser Char escapeChar = char '\\' *> asum [ str "'" $> '\'', str "\"" $> '"', str "\\" $> '\\', str "n" $> '\n', str "r" $> '\r', str "t" $> '\t', str "b" $> '\b', str "f" $> '\f', str "u" *> (chr . fromIntegral . collectDigits 16 <$> replicateM 4 (digit 16)) ] jsonString :: SParser String jsonString = char '"' *> many (asum [charIf (\c -> c /= '"' && c /= '\\'), escapeChar]) <* char '"' jsonObjectPair :: SParser (String, JSON) jsonObjectPair = (,) <$> (whitespace *> jsonString <* whitespace <* char ':') <*> json json :: SParser JSON json = whitespace *> asum [ Object <$> fromList <$> (char '{' *> jsonObjectPair `sepBy` char ',' <* char '}'), Array <$> (char '[' *> json `sepBy` char ',' <* char ']'), Bool <$> asum [str "true" $> True, str "false" $> False], Number <$> jsonNumber, String <$> jsonString, Null <$ str "null" ] <* whitespace main :: IO () main = interact $ show . parse jsonThis parses numbers as my own weird
Decimaltype, in order to preserve all information (converting toDoubleis lossy). I didn’t bother implementing any methods on theDecimal, because there are other libraries that do that and we’re just writing a parser.It’s also slow as hell but hey, that’s naive implementations for you!
It ended up being 113 lines. I think I could reduce it a bit more if I was willing to sacrifice readability and/or just inline things instead of implementing stdlib typeclasses.
So, ARE you bringing a girl?
I’m not coming to my parents for this new year’s because I might get arrested and/or sent to die in a war. But once Putin dies, yes, I am
So that’s two things to look forward to!
Didn’t know where you were talking about til you said Putin.
You could probably write a very basic parser combinator library, enough to parse JSON, in 100 lines of Haskell
Judging by the Parser newtype, he did.
Just looking at the image, yeah he’s a little parser combinator library entirely from scratch.
Not sure what you mean by verbose type declarations. It looks to be 2 type declarations in a few lines of code (a newtype for the parser and a sum type to represent the different types of JSON values). It’s really not much at all.
With recursive list comprehensions you can cram quite some complexity into one line of code.
Haskell is succinct.

serde has entered the chat
From Scratch (as much as I like Rust, it’s very likely more verbose from scratch). Haskell is perfect for these kinds of things.
I will concede that implementing the first version in Haskell would be better.
Mostly so that we can then fulfil the meme of reimplementing it Rust!
Personally I’m more partial to nom. Serde is quite verbose and complex for a parser.
Who needs a girl when you have monads to keep you warm?
Or become a girl with gonads
Well, JSON is an easy format to parse. The spec can fit onto one page.
There are far more male programmers… As a programmer, be gay or stay alone… Choose!
Oh that explains why my wife is gay
And clearly it worked!
She sleeps with men, that’s pretty gay
There are a lot of things she does but that aint one of them
Think you forgot to check their username before commenting that haha
Thats a hell of a way to find out.
There are those who transition, so a significant chunk of that male programmer population is “male” as in quotation marks, only that some transition earlier than others. Does not guarantee that you can get the transgender autistic puppygirl (or other variations) of your dreams, since many of them are lesbians.
But also feel free to look outside your field for a partner. It’s okay to date an artist as a programmer.
Feels weird reading this as the only single woman programmer in my friend group who likes men
I think programmer should be seen as a gender itself.
I’m currently transitioning myself, already have a homeserver and a Linux PC, can’t wait to be a real programmer.
and gender confirmation would not be getting called sir/ma’am at the starbucks but people asking you for IT help?
Just slurs, shouted angrily and incoherently whike they blame you for all the shit that was designed (by someone else) to not work.
I detransitioned from being a programmer and all I have is depression since, maybe I should retransission into being a programmer
It’s not gay if I’m wearing programming socks.
You just need to find a girl that also likes Tsoding! Then, you can ask her “Hey, do you have plans for Christmas? I’d love it if we could do AoC (Advent of Code) in a language we both hate!”
Well shit, I’ve never seen AoC before - I’m not usually very interested in programming just for fun, but I might give that a try!
NOTE: no proper error reporting
Add those few lines, will ya?
But that would break the 111 line rule.
There’s a rule?
Not anymore.
I wouldn’t trust a guy letting their battery go that low either
A JSON parser in Haskell, what a day to have eyes
?
Haskell’s incredibly good for writing parsers.
But oh boy is it difficult. We started with Haskell in the first semester CS and it was a pain. Kudos to anyone seriously developing in Haskell.
Eh, it’s just different. Other languages are hard in other ways. Haskell’s at least have very good reason behind them.
I write Haskell professionally and and am teaching to people without any experience, and it’s really no different than anything else. Though I will say that my experience is that university professors are often pretty clueless about the language and don’t teach it well.
I think it’s the paradigm change. Most people including myself learnt some kind of procedural language in school, shifting towards functional thinking is just very difficult. But of course that’s a skill a computer scientist must have and one of the reasons I didn’t graduate.
AI girlfriend




