Understanding map and apply

http://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/posts/elevated-world/

by ingve • 11 years ago

37 3 11 years ago

Very cool discussion regarding higher-kinded programming and FP concepts in general. One thing I don't get is when the author writes:

  Personally, I try to avoid using the word "monad"
  on this site and focus on the bind function
  instead, as part of a toolkit of functions for
  solving problems rather than an abstract concept.

That's pretty much the definition of "monad."[1] Why shrink from it? Unless the author for some reason is worried that their content will be shunned due to using the proper terms for concepts being discussed.

1 - Yes, the existence of a bind operator is not required for satisfying the Monad laws. Which is why I said "pretty much."

alloyed• 11 years ago

their content will be shunned due to using the proper terms for concepts being discussed.

I think this is exactly it. Consider that a lot of people looking at F# are already using C# in "business"-type applications, with or without formal training, and might have negative associations towards the FP weenie club.

grndn• 11 years ago

Many FP-ers believe that you need to use understand the math or at least use the "right" terminology before using monads.

There is an obvious counter-example. Millions of C# developers are using monads already under the name of "LINQ". I don't think it would have been as popular if Microsoft called things by their "right" names.

Understanding map and apply

Related Stories