I think the author meant "just" as in: it is only another name. In Haskell, you can make an infix operator out of a function by putting it between backticks. Thus, `fmap` and <$> are synonyms. For example:
(subtract 3) <$> [1,2,3,4] -- =[-2,-1,0,1]
(subtract 3) `fmap` [1,2,3,4] -- =[-2,-1,0,1]My reading of that sentence is that “<$> might rightfully scare you but it is only a synonym for the fmap function.” Does that still sound arrogant?
Re:Haskell's Operator Glossary
by ginnungagap on Monday September 19, 2022 @07:41AM
(#32897002)
As a mathematician this looks like standard usage of "just" in mathematics, but I do try to avoid doing that because it does sound arrogant and patronizing
Re:Haskell's Operator Glossary
by nh23423fefe on Monday September 19, 2022 @10:24AM
(#32898749)
yeah, the ignorant tend to misunderstand and incorrectly infer intent.
This kind of "just" falls in the category of when mathematicians say "trivial" as in "deducible in few steps using the only applicable axioms", which mistakingly sounds like an arrogant "easy" to non-mathematicians.