4 ms·
This is a great post. I come back to it frequently. There's beautiful clarity in the articulation, and the essence is easy to grasp yet powerful. It reminds
by spinningslate 5y ago
This is a great post. I come back to it frequently.
There's beautiful clarity in the articulation, and the essence is easy to grasp yet powerful. It reminds me a bit of Scott Wlaschin's Railway Oriented Programming (ROP) [0]. As a technique, ROP nicely complements "parse don't validate". As an explanation, it's similarly simple yet wonderfully effective.
I've a real admiration for people who can explain and present things so clearly. With ROP, for example, the reader learns the basics of monads without even realising it.
[0]: https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/rop/ https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/rop/
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y agoI agree. It's a very well-written post. I am not a Haskell person, but it was quite clear to me. I feel that we don't put enough value, these days, on the ability to write clear, articulate exposition. Also, I believe that many people are not willing to read articles, books, or papers, of any meaningful length. Everything needs to be boiled down to <10 min. read time, or <18 min. TED talks.
- themulticaster 5y agoThe way you somewhat randomly mention the value of clear and articulate exposition makes me assume you just had to wade through a 300-page specification document for a government contract regarding pencil sharpeners or something similar. If that's the case, you have my sympathy. Anyways, I definitely agree.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y agoNot recently (thank the Gods), but I used to work for a defense contractor, and I have dealt with many specification documents (like the Bluetooth spec).
- wrycoder 5y agoThose are the extras. This is the post: https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/posts/recipe-part2/ https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/posts/recipe-part2/