throwawayignt

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by throwawayignt 11y ago

   Haskell doesn't have a reputation of bad pedagogy per se. My only point was what anyone's reaction should be when their personal impression is "bad pedagogy", in any area of software. It means that something is missing
2. 2.▲
   by throwawayignt 11y ago

   I'm sorry, can you give a single example in the arts and sciences of something that has a reputation for "poor pedagogy"? (But is in fact just inherently difficult.) Here are some inherently difficult subjects: quantum field
3. 3.▲
   by throwawayignt 11y ago

   it's inappropriate to make ad hominem attacks here, please refrain from doing so. I didn't name any shortcomings in Haskell, I gave a general rule of thumb. However, as you yourself demonstrate dramatically, by using an ad hominem
4. 4.▲
   by throwawayignt 11y ago

   If you ever see anything online that has more than, say, half a dozen users, then it is NEVER the case that it suffers from "poor pedagogy". Why? Because it only takes 1 person to explain something, even if it's brief, peop
5. 5.▲
   by throwawayignt 11y ago

   >> Category theory codifies this compositional style into a design pattern, the category. >To the average person, a theory codifying a style into a pattern just isn't useful But you don't mean "the average person&quo