2 ms·
How am I misunderstanding? I am quoting exact words, after all. Re IORef and STRef, let's quote some more: "Representing effects in value types is a double edg
by sanxiyn 11y ago
How am I misunderstanding? I am quoting exact words, after all. Re IORef and STRef, let's quote some more:
"Representing effects in value types is a double edged sword (p. 42). Haskell has fractured into monadic and non-monadic sub-languages (p. 44). Monad transformers produce a layered structure (p. 45)." These are section titles, be sure to read the entire sections which explain in details what the title means.
- RyanZAG 11y agoI can't work out why you're being downvoted. Kneejerk reaction for anything that is critical of Haskell maybe? Unfortunately that does seem to be very common on HN. Ben Lippmeier makes a very good point and is being quoted in full here. Haskell does have issues, and people are trying to fix those issues. If they can be resolved isn't known yet, and the resulting language may be different from Haskell. Haskell is a long way from some pinnacle of perfection, and it is very much not a silver bullet to solving problems. Not that anything in computer software is a silver bullet [1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wyd6J3yjcs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wyd6J3yjcs