3 ms·

I'm really sorry author, but this is how I read your post: >This is like someone new to a language with regular expressions asking what a regular expression, i

I'm really sorry author, but this is how I read your post: >This is like someone new to a language with regular expressions asking what a regular expression, is, or someone new to object oriented programming asking what a class or object is, or someone new to functional programming asking what functional programming is, or someone new to node.js asking what node.js is, or someone new to programming asking what a program is. >What's _wrong_ with you people? These are horrible questions. I refuse to answer them, and you should know better than to ask. Yes, I could illustrate, but why should I? >I prefer to just explain that it's a question that won't help you in the slightest. I'm not going to illustrate something that will, or give you any examples. >Just do it. The important thing is, not in front of me. Author, you could vastly improve your blog post by actually doing the teaching instead of sending the student off.

tome 12y ago
The article is criticizing people who explain monads badly, not people who are trying to learn about monads.
- logicallee 12y ago
  You didn't really read it carefully then. It's criticizing the question. You can't "criticize people who explain monads badly" without explaining monads well. Think about it. This is like me criticizing how classes are taught, without offering my version or showing how they should be taught. Come on. I'm afraid this post is completely without any value. It's an outline for the post that the author should write, when the author figures out how to teach monads (which don't exist in all languages) properly. Building up from several usage cases, per the author's outline. The only problem with the outline is that it's notes to self on how to teach monads well. Well, go ahead then. Put your money where your mouth is and teach people who have never used a monad how to use a monad. Which is why they're asking.

tome 12y ago

The article is criticizing people who explain monads badly, not people who are trying to learn about monads.

logicallee 12y ago
You didn't really read it carefully then. It's criticizing the question. You can't "criticize people who explain monads badly" without explaining monads well. Think about it. This is like me criticizing how classes are taught, without offering my version or showing how they should be taught. Come on. I'm afraid this post is completely without any value. It's an outline for the post that the author should write, when the author figures out how to teach monads (which don't exist in all languages) properly. Building up from several usage cases, per the author's outline. The only problem with the outline is that it's notes to self on how to teach monads well. Well, go ahead then. Put your money where your mouth is and teach people who have never used a monad how to use a monad. Which is why they're asking.