I have and I will, but let's be clear on one thing: you have never taught a single person an understanding of monads. You have the power and intelligence to change that right now.
-
-
Well that's verifiably incorrect. I have sold tens of thousands of copies of a book that includes an appendix on monads. I've had thousands of people take my FP course where I briefly intro monads. I understand you consider all that zero. But it's not zero.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
No, really, it's zero. You have provided solid evidence for this. "Books and courses" do not change this fact. If you would just make the effort to put aside the personal stuff, and get on with learning, you could have a good, solid laugh at yourself, move on and improve.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's just impossible for me to get past your condescension. Sorry. Guess I'm not a big enough person to handle your teaching technique.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Are you going to try to slink away by subtle personal attacks on me? That never ends well when we play by those rules. When are we going to learn the subject?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm not subtly or overtly attacking you, personally or otherwise. I don't like your teaching techniques or tone. I wouldn't sit in your class. I concede that you have had your success in your world. But you showed up in my tweets.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm sure you have had success as well, but not in explaining monads, to yourself and others. Are you at all interested in improving this? I don't win a trophy if you admit to your misunderstanding. It's to your benefit, your audience, and therefore, everyone.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
and yet, still in my tweets, you keep trying to persuade (some might say bully) me through condescension. what you have accomplished is that I am certain I'm on the right path of providing what I believe are better paths, and that I need to keep learning and getting better.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Oh OK, so you will insist on taking it personally, and continue to not understand the subject at an elementary level. Well, thanks for answering the question Pete!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
right, because you're convinced my paths of learning more are so flawed/insufficient, you can't even accept "I'm going to go learn more" without condescension. do you see why that comes across as you implying only you have the "one true way"?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
blah blah blah personal bullshit blah blah blah It's 2020. You still don't understand monads at an elementary level.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.