3 ms·
It's barely jargon. I think a lot of people know that Haskell is a pure functional language, and arrays and hash maps are both examples of functors. I don't kn
by bussierem 6y ago
It's barely jargon. I think a lot of people know that Haskell is a pure functional language, and arrays and hash maps are both examples of functors. I don't know what a monad is, but I think it's mostly hard to parse because it's not clearly written.
I would challenge you to share this with a non-developer friend and see what they think about that statement. You should consider what your personal experiences are with something before making such rather aloof statements towards others.
- hangsi 6y agoA monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors, what's the problem?
- throwaway2245 6y agoI can note a few differences here: - People outside the field likely have enough concept of weaving (or fabrics) to know what the terminology might refer to. - Weaving terminology is woven into our language(s). Before the industrial revolution, that was a huge labour industry - it was part of family/daily life. - Words like 'sett' and 'weft' are clearly domain-specific and could be looked up. That's far less clear for 'language' and 'array' and 'map'; non-specialists are unlikely to recognise they are being used in a domain-specific way. Is a 'hash map' a type of map?
- jpcooper 6y agoHash maps are not functors similarly to how sets are not functors. That is because they do not preserve function composition.