4 ms·
Python doesn't require you to understand monads to write useful Python. To be clear: Haskell is great, but its entire vibe (lazy evaluation, pure functions) is
by shadowgovt 9mo ago
Python doesn't require you to understand monads to write useful Python.
To be clear: Haskell is great, but its entire vibe (lazy evaluation, pure functions) is entirely different from what Python's about. Someone who knows C++ or Java has a much bigger gap to jump to pick up Haskell than to pick up Python.
- exceptione 9mo ago> Someone who knows C++ or Java has a much bigger gap to jump to pick up Haskell than to pick up Python. True, they are all imperative c-style languages. > Python doesn't require you to understand monads to write useful Python. If that is the concern I would recommend anyone interested to dabble with F#. Part of its design philosophy is to keep the complexity out wrt type systems. It offers a vast vetted library¹, better dependency management², it is truly multi-paradigm (imperative, functional and oop), vastly better performance, and it is strongly typed without requiring type annotations³. I know I am not going to sell it to monogamous devs, but those that are open minded should give it a try. ___ ¹ This is something people will start to appreciate once they get serious about the risk of supply chain attacks. ² Python developers feel they are doing fine with pip or uv, at least in my experience, but then I find they haven't dealt with package mgmt in alternative languages. ³ Types in python are a hack, bolting on something afterwards will not reach what is possible with a language that has been designed with types as core element.