4 ms·
> If you've used `forEach()` in imperative languages then you understand functors. You understand a single (or a class of) functor but I don't think it means y
by tylerhou 6y ago
> If you've used `forEach()` in imperative languages then you understand functors.
You understand a single (or a class of) functor but I don't think it means you understand functors in general.
You also definitely don't understand how functors fit into Haskell's type hierarchy — its relation to monoids, monads, etc.
- johnday 6y agoAbsolutely. I'm only saying in relation to the idea of "reading Haskell code", it is possible to understand how they work (at the shallowest level) by analogy to `forEach` and to shell syntax. Shell syntax also doesn't explain important constructs like currying, partial application, etc. But it's good enough that someone can read "boring" haskell code without being intimidated and turned off.
- yakshaving_jgt 6y agoYou don't need to understand the functor of functions in order to be productive in Haskell and use functors generally.