Miss Dada  🏳️‍⚧️

it's always nice to have an abstraction when you want it, but many abstractions are *completely friggin confusing*.

one should generally avoid applying unifying abstractions unless there's a compelling reason to. Not just because it exists.

Are you suggesting that monads don’t have a “compelling reason”? (Not that Rust has monads, naturally)

the only one I think I've heard was having a generic `(F . G) T => (G . F) T` (Vec<Option<T>> => Option<Vec<T>>) via @sgriff.

err @sgrif But even that hurts my brain (How do I get None? One None? All Nones???)

there's very marginal value in "this is nothing more than a Frobit with an inverted Bleepblop clause": x <~ y $ z

some amount of boilerplate can make factoring and understanding code easier. This is broken for Very Common Actions.

I’m not sure that follows. `map` on a list is “boilerplate” for a very common action, but few people would say that’s broken