3 ms·

You have to start with the 'simplified but not technically perfectly correct' and then add in the nuances to get to the real point. Starting with words like 'fu

• Littlebigo 5y ago
  The article is likely aimed at intermediate-ish FP programmers, though, not people with no prior knowledge. (Although I suspect it is an example of "learning by teaching", since it is wrong on many counts.) Learn You a Haskell mentions functors in chapter 8 and teaches them properly in chapter 11. http://learnyouahaskell.com/making-our-own-types-and-typeclasses#the-functor-typeclass http://learnyouahaskell.com/making-our-own-types-and-typecla...
  • mhitza 5y ago
    In my opinion Monads at this point should be considered a beginner Haskell concept. Regardless of how LYAH chooses to order things, (when have you used a Zipper last time?), they are too essential to any beginner Haskell program. In my opinion we need a new imperative first approach to Haskell teaching, to develop intuition on monads quickly.
• JadeNB 5y ago
  > Starting with words like 'functors' that most software engineers today will not be able to define is not useful. But the parent post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28476325 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28476325 to which lmm was responding https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28476569 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28476569 said "Wait, a functor is just a pure unary function?" If someone asks you the definition of a technical term, you sort of have to at least refer to the technical term.