News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why category theory matters in programming. Parent comment

Re:Why category theory matters in programming by hota_mazi on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @10:27PM (#15244582)
It's not just monad transformers, monads themselves are pretty awkward to use in any language that's not Haskell. And actually, a lot of FP languages simply don't even have monads at all (OCaml, F#).

Monads should never have escaped Haskell.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why category theory matters in programming by tome on Thursday September 14, 2017 @05:37AM (#15246282)
> Monads should never have escaped Haskell.

They should have put them in a monad.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why category theory matters in programming by s4vi0r on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @10:58PM (#15244690)
Isn't a Monad just the fancy name for a type/structure that implements map and flatMap in a lawful manner?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why category theory matters in programming by hota_mazi on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:21PM (#15244768)
Close: the required operations are `flatMap` and bind/pure/point/lift/return/whatever-you-want-to-call-it.

You can derive `map` from these two other functions so it doesn't need to be part of the interface.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why category theory matters in programming by ebola1717 on Thursday September 14, 2017 @10:15AM (#15248218)
Bind is flatMap (>>=)

Confusingly, map in scala is fmap in Haskell

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why category theory matters in programming by hota_mazi on Thursday September 14, 2017 @12:04PM (#15249323)
Oops you're right of course. And I can't edit my post.
[ Parent | on HN ]