|
By the way, I highly recommend this to anyone who wants to figure out what haskellers are talking about with category theory crap, without the annoying wankery. But do not read this sort of thing before you go learn a bit of haskell. That's like trying to understand dependency injection without understanding objects. That's just a route to thinking it's all incomprehensible. Unfortunately, both versions (the wiki and the original "issue 13" link at the top) have trade-offs. I *think* the best way through it these days is to read the wiki one, but only the intro, functor, applicative, monad, and monoid sections. Skip the rest. Just that much, however, is exceptionally useful to know, even if you don't write haskell. These things are really generic ways of composing little pieces into bigger pieces, and it's extremely helpful when designing things to know about them.
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:05 |
|
|
I don't know Elm, but try removing the type signature on 'partial' and see if that works. Lexically scoping type variables is a sort of newish thing, Elm may not support it? (That is, it's possible when you write 'Tree a' in 'partial' that the 'a' is a different 'a' from the one in the type of 'fold') edit: It looks like i'm right. See the link they post in that very error message.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Colonel Taint posted:what's the different between 'extending the language' and building an API/library then? There's a lot of bullshit around the phrase. My phd is on language extension, and at one point I quote someone from the 70s talking about how the "class" keyword extends the language with new types in this newfangled Simula language! Assume the phrase means nothing, along with other phrases like "strong/weak typing". Look at what they're actually doing instead. SICP was originally authored in 79, it could well be "marvel at functions, you GOSUB BASIC-plebs!" crazypenguin fucked around with this message at 16:52 on May 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2017 16:50
|
|