2 ms·

Speaking for myself I think FP is going to have its moment and it will be when average devs can ignore the syntax and theories in the abstract and just solve pr

Speaking for myself I think FP is going to have its moment and it will be when average devs can ignore the syntax and theories in the abstract and just solve problems. Pretty much everything is better with FP and walking a reasonable line when showing benefits _without_ immediately diving into all the esoteric parts wins people. We need the MVC of FP type of trendy bandwagon. The FP rails. I am optimistic about Roc and hope Rust also continues to help make FP style programming more commonplace even if I still dont know how to implement a monad.

epgui 3y ago
Re: monad For my part, the most confusing thing was that I was trying to understand monads by looking at both haskell and category theory. However, a monad in computer code is a different beast than a monad in category theory (I believe this may be true in every programming language currently, but if you have a counter-example I'd love to hear about it). They look vaguely similar, but aren’t the same thing. Nobody told me this, but it greatly simplified comprehension once I had that epiphany. A lot of monad explanations just confuse monads and functors too (functors are your burritos / wrapper data types; and functors should probably be understood before monads). IMO seeing monads as being primarily about function composition, kind of like the functions `compose` or `pipe` or `thread_first` or `thread_last`… but in a context that makes use of functors, is the best way to really see the core simplicity of the idea.