I don't feel at all that this is true. It is not necessary to understand monads to get good work done in Haskell for basically any purpose. Authoring monads is

I don't feel at all that this is true. It is not necessary to understand monads to get good work done in Haskell for basically any purpose. Authoring monads is something usually left to library authors, and for basic users it's just a nifty interface that lets you do handy things in imperative style haskell ('do' syntax). I don't want to be defensive in this thread, since obviously getting real about deficiencies in Haskell is a great way of making a path for positive change, but the spreading of the idea that monads are magical and hard is dangerous. It's similar to how back in the day Java and PHP developers dismissed Ruby on Rails for being magical and hard to understand with weird syntax. The truth is that Ruby on Rails was very easy to use regardless of its rather complex innards, and once you get a good handle on Ruby, even the Rails innards weren't all that difficult to understand and extend. The hard part of learning Haskell is getting to grips with functional style programming and understanding the power of its type system. Learning that is rewarding and has a low entry-barrier, it's even something I'd recommend to someone who has never programmed before. Don't worry about monads.