4 ms·

> I would prefer to have HKTs and typeclasses, so I may implement my own IO monad. I'm not a Java developer, and I haven't even read about higher kinded types

> I would prefer to have HKTs and typeclasses, so I may implement my own IO monad. I'm not a Java developer, and I haven't even read about higher kinded types or typeclasses (the theory side of programming is my weakness); but you picked my curiosity with this. Can you elaborate how concurrency done this way would look in Java?

pshirshov 4y ago
Ideally like this: https://zio.dev/reference/#concurrency https://zio.dev/reference/#concurrency Or this: https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=fork https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=fork
- bluetech 4y ago
  Some discussion on zio in loom-dev mailing list recently: https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/2023-March/005350.html https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/2023-March/00535...
  - pshirshov 4y ago
    Loom is useful as an underlying mechanism for an IO monad. What I mean is that Java as language still lacks important features so they have to deliver half-baked things like that "structured concurrency". From my point of view these new abstractions are evil - the better ones were out there for a while.
- ackfoobar 4y ago
  Other than STM, what is special? Almost everything there has an equivalent in traditional imperative programming.
  - pshirshov 4y ago
    More contracts enforced by the typer. > Almost everything there Everything. But the mere presence of "equivalents" doesn't make pure functional programming less valuable.
    - ackfoobar 4y ago
      I have used cats-effect but not ZIO. My view has been that reinventing imperative programming (IO monad) on math (pure FP) on imperative programming (the machine) brings me no benefit. What does a coarse-grained effect type get you? The hard part of concurrent programming is concurrency, rather than knowing what code is effectful.
      - pshirshov 4y ago
        > What does a coarse-grained effect type get you? For monofunctors: reliable error handling, an ability to re-interpret the same IO structure multiple times, better reasoning during refactorings due to referential transparency. For bifunctors: the above plus explicit domain (expected) error encoding and even more reliable error handling.

pshirshov 4y ago

Ideally like this: https://zio.dev/reference/#concurrency https://zio.dev/reference/#concurrency Or this: https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=fork https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=fork

bluetech 4y ago
Some discussion on zio in loom-dev mailing list recently: https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/2023-March/005350.html https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/2023-March/00535...
- pshirshov 4y ago
  Loom is useful as an underlying mechanism for an IO monad. What I mean is that Java as language still lacks important features so they have to deliver half-baked things like that "structured concurrency". From my point of view these new abstractions are evil - the better ones were out there for a while.
ackfoobar 4y ago
Other than STM, what is special? Almost everything there has an equivalent in traditional imperative programming.
- pshirshov 4y ago
  More contracts enforced by the typer. > Almost everything there Everything. But the mere presence of "equivalents" doesn't make pure functional programming less valuable.
  - ackfoobar 4y ago
    I have used cats-effect but not ZIO. My view has been that reinventing imperative programming (IO monad) on math (pure FP) on imperative programming (the machine) brings me no benefit. What does a coarse-grained effect type get you? The hard part of concurrent programming is concurrency, rather than knowing what code is effectful.
    - pshirshov 4y ago
      > What does a coarse-grained effect type get you? For monofunctors: reliable error handling, an ability to re-interpret the same IO structure multiple times, better reasoning during refactorings due to referential transparency. For bifunctors: the above plus explicit domain (expected) error encoding and even more reliable error handling.