4 ms·
> the language itself is not that complicated I find Haskell quite complicated, involving abstract concepts you would likely not consciously encounter in other
by acchow 3y ago
> the language itself is not that complicated
I find Haskell quite complicated, involving abstract concepts you would likely not consciously encounter in other languages (lenses, monad transformers, free monads, etc).
- nequo 3y agoLenses and monad transformers are libraries, not part of the language. It doesn't look like the book uses them, so you don't need to understand them in order to follow it: https://nostarch.com/learn-physics-functional-programming https://nostarch.com/learn-physics-functional-programming
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- itishappy 3y agoIt doesn't need to be. You can do so much with just data declarations and typeclasses. https://www.simplehaskell.org/ https://www.simplehaskell.org/ (disclaimer: not a huge fan of the sight design, but I fully support the concept)