News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Dueling Rhetoric of Clojure and Haskell. Parent comment

Re:Dueling Rhetoric of Clojure and Haskell by dboreham on Wednesday November 01, 2017 @04:27PM (#15605153)
>"a monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors"

Once I discovered the Monad thing in Haskell has pretty much nothing to do with the Monad in Category Theory, everything made much more sense. As a bonus I now (sort of) understand Category Theory. Much the same as Relational Databases have not very much to do with Relational Algebra.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dueling Rhetoric of Clojure and Haskell by tome on Wednesday November 01, 2017 @05:48PM (#15605789)
This is a very important point although I would slightly tweak this

> the Monad thing in Haskell has pretty much nothing to do with the Monad in Category Theory

to "the Monad thing in Haskell is a very simple special case of the Monad in Category Theory". Thinking you have to "learn category theory" before you can use a Monad in Haskell is like thinking you have to learn this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Function_space#Functional_anal...

before using a function.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dueling Rhetoric of Clojure and Haskell by pleasecalllater on Wednesday November 01, 2017 @05:01PM (#15605438)
Indeed. And this is a great comment.
[ Parent | on HN ]