1: You know how people think the Ruby stdlib convention of `!` for mutation conflicts with the Rails convention of `!` for exceptions?
-
-
I wish that either we had a more approachable way to talk about them or that math phobia wasn't such a thing.
-
"thing that collects side effects" is only confusing because people really really want it to be confusing.
-
They think they don't want it to be hard and then write shit like this: https://wiki.haskell.org/All_About_Monads#Why_should_I_make_the_effort_to_understand_monads.3F … Which betrays their mind.
-
The state of monad education in Haskell is... extremely not great. We still haven't been able to improve much on http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/papers/marktoberdorf/baastad.pdf …
-
Then again, that original paper by Wadler is very approachable for a CS paper about abstract nonsense.
-
Part of the issue is that the abstract description doesn't really match the implementation of common monads like state.
-
How does it not match?
-
You have to think very abstractly about monadic values being functions. It's now how the basic description of monads implies it would work.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Ooh! "A method with a bang in Ruby would get a monad-based type in Haskell." Yeah, okay, don't put it that way.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.