5 ms·
There's some interesting research and ideas here, but it does seem like monads "ate everything for lunch" back in the late 1990s and 2000s when it comes to enco
by klodolph 6y ago
There's some interesting research and ideas here, but it does seem like monads "ate everything for lunch" back in the late 1990s and 2000s when it comes to encoding effects, probably because monads are a bit more ergonomic (which seems like a weird thing to say, given the reputation monads have for being abstract nonsense). So effect systems didn't get as much research as everyone was interested in monads, and now that monads have dried up a bit as a field of research for encoding effects, I'm interested to see what other systems people invent.
- The_rationalist 6y agoArrow Fx make monads obscoletes, see the table https://arrow-kt.io/docs/fx/polymorphism/ https://arrow-kt.io/docs/fx/polymorphism/
- klodolph 6y agoThe page you linked to describes monads. It sounds like you’re not describing something that makes monads obsolete, but merely a DSL for Kotlin that makes it easier to use monads. Haskell doesn't need that, because monads are already part of the core syntax of the language.
- The_rationalist 6y agoYou clearly didn't read the table that compare the verbosity and cognitive overhead of the Haskell way vs the fx way
- klodolph 6y ago> You clearly didn't read… Just a word of advice—you’re digging yourself in a hole if you make low-quality, ad-hominem comments like that. Comments of the form “you didn’t read X” are specifically discouraged on HN. Maybe you feel good writing it, but nobody feels good reading it and nobody learns anything. I took another look at the page you linked and it still looks like syntactic sugar for Monads. It’s still monads. Monads monads monads. Applicative and Functor are generalizations of Monad.