News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Programming with Effects by zozbot234 on Sunday November 24, 2019 @06:00AM (#21619633)
In a typical PL context "effects" is always short for algebraic effects, and this article doesn't address those at all. Downvoted due to misleading title.
Re:Programming with Effects by curryhoward on Sunday November 24, 2019 @06:24AM (#21619721)
> In a typical PL context "effects" is always short for algebraic effects

The word "effects" has a long and storied history in programming language theory that predates algebraic effects/handlers by decades. The study of effect systems includes algebraic effects but also monads and other type and effect systems. In some situations the lines between these are blurred, for example with "extensible effects" which are algebraic effects implemented by a free(r) monad combined with "data types a la carte"-style open unions.

Re:Programming with Effects by tel on Sunday November 24, 2019 @01:09PM (#21622145)
Algebraic effects are a popular subclass of effects, but not all effects of use in programming (or worthy of study!) are algebraic.

The simplest example is the continuation effect. It's not immediately clear why this effect isn't algebraic (it's not even immediately clear what "algebraic" means) but suffice to say continuations are very weird and behave very differently from other effects.

At the same time, they're very useful and are a useful part of someone's programming vocabulary.

Re:Programming with Effects by lonelappde on Sunday November 24, 2019 @04:49PM (#21623684)
You are downvoting because the article is about what it said in the headline and not something else?

Because a news site is only for "typical" things?