And I'm not sure if I've succeeded. But my approach was to try to avoid drawing any analogy with a particular everyday object (like a burrito) and focus on the types (in particular the flattening operation), because they're really the domain where monads apply.
-
-
Show this thread
-
But a good teacher can be judged on how they explain monads, so I'd like this lesson to be exemplary. If anyone has any suggestions for improvements, I'd love to know!
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Tough subject. I've always thought the best description is "they are an abstraction for sequencing and flow control". I then show top down examples with Future, Either, and Option. When you describe it at the type level, you are assuming a level of knowledge that may not exist.
-
Also I'm a rando on the internet, so please ignore :)
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.