#strangeloop slides by @odersky now up at https://github.com/strangeloop/StrangeLoop2013/blob/master/slides/sessions/Odersky-TroubleWithTypes.pptx … , DOT/Dotty material starts on slide 34 (motivated by slides 26-33)
-
-
Replying to @SethTisue
@SethTisue@odersky How would one write def fmap[A, B, M[_]](m: M[A], f: A => B): M[B] in that?1 reply 2 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @dcsobral
@dcsobral@SethTisue Probably the same as now. Expansion is: def fmap[A, B, M](m: M { type T = A }, f: A => B): M { type T = B }7 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @odersky
@odersky I added current scala to https://gist.github.com/nuttycom/6690987 … for comparison. Which is simpler?1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @djspiewak
@djspiewak could there be more ergonomic, first-class solutions to the problems you're solving with that sort of abstraction? /cc@odersky3 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @mergeconflict
@djspiewak e.g. abstracting over monads loses some of its appeal when you have composable effects in your language. /cc@odersky2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @mergeconflict
@mergeconflict@odersky Monads are the essence of sequential dependent composition. Why make them primitive?1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @djspiewak
@djspiewak because they're extremely clumsy in the absence of special syntax, and even more so when composing them. /cc@odersky3 replies 1 retweet 0 likes
@mergeconflict @djspiewak @odersky I genuinely do not know where these ideas come from. WTF?
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.