5 ms·
I found this useful as a Rust dev: https://varkor.github.io/blog/2019/03/28/idiomatic-monads-in-rust.html https://varkor.github.io/blog/2019/03/28/idiomatic-mon
by staticassertion 5y ago
I found this useful as a Rust dev:
https://varkor.github.io/blog/2019/03/28/idiomatic-monads-in-rust.html https://varkor.github.io/blog/2019/03/28/idiomatic-monads-in...
I agree with you entirely that the Haskell syntax is probably one of the biggest issues with monads being approachable.
- wyager 5y agoThis blog post is maybe 10% about monads and 90% dealing with why you can’t have them in rust (no HKTs). I hardly think that’s more approachable…
- staticassertion 5y agoIt was for me.
- aszen 5y agoIs that true though, you can't define a generic monadic interface yes but you can implement the same interface for your data types. That makes it less useful as the post says but still pretty powerful in some cases
- the_af 5y agoWhat's difficult about Haskell syntax? Or do you mean "it's an issue because it doesn't look like C, Java or Python?".
- toastal 5y agoIn many ways Haskell (and other languages in the ML family) are LISP with a lot less parentheses.
- the_af 5y agoIn which ways? I don't find lisp syntax confusing either.
- magicalhippo 5y agoFor me it is indeed the latter. I can glean a lot of interesting stuff from other languages as long as they look a bit familiar. Haskell I usually come to a dead stop pretty quickly. I've tried to read up on some Haskell basics, but the main issue is I don't have any real incentive to use Haskell, I have other hobbies that are more tempting, so I forget pretty quick. The Java-ish version of the Functor interface for instance was quite readable to me, ugly or not.