@puffnfresh in F# we call them computation expressions, but they can do some extra stuff
-
-
Replying to @rickasaurus
@rickasaurus@puffnfresh problem is F# misses the practical purpose of monads, to abstract on all monads.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
@dibblego@puffnfresh it sort of separates the monadic type from the code rewriting machinery in an interesting way though.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rickasaurus
@rickasaurus@puffnfresh if it is the insignificant, superficial detail left after removal of all practical purpose, what is interesting?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
@dibblego@puffnfresh I think that's a bit unfair. F# had comprehensive async before haskell after all.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rickasaurus
@rickasaurus@puffnfresh Haskell is not the point. F# completely misses the practical purpose of monads. Like C#.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
@dibblego@puffnfresh For example, we'd all very much like GATDs, but there's no obvious and fast way to implement them.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rickasaurus
@rickasaurus@puffnfresh in the meantime let's not point to F# as a practical implementation of the concept "monad." It's not.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
@dibblego@puffnfresh It's still useful, just better to not call it a monad1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rickasaurus
@rickasaurus@dibblego@puffnfresh naming high-level abstraction can be difficult because there are no trivial names for it...5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@mapastr @rickasaurus @puffnfresh Those who obsess over labels are not willing students. They were never going to understand anyway.
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.