Why do people never use regular words when describing functional programming concepts?
This was initially promising but, like every other "let me explain functional programming" write-ups, reduced to inscrutable babble before we make any headway.
Case in point: author starts talking about monadic composition before explaining what a monad is!
What would be helpful is avoiding functional programming terms, explaining concepts in everyday English (or non-FP terms) then labeling those concepts after the fact.
Maybe instead of functional composition, call it an array of functions that pass their return value to the next function in the array. Or a promise.
If that would be that easy but if you want really easy introduction to category theory then check a book "how to bake a pie" by Eugenia Cheng have a good read
Also try this material I mean aforementioned blog by Bartosz Milewski and go through it but do it really SLOWLY and then things start to make sense and in all honesty there is no easy way to mathematics in general
3 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 30.1 ms ] threadThis was initially promising but, like every other "let me explain functional programming" write-ups, reduced to inscrutable babble before we make any headway.
Case in point: author starts talking about monadic composition before explaining what a monad is!
What would be helpful is avoiding functional programming terms, explaining concepts in everyday English (or non-FP terms) then labeling those concepts after the fact.
Maybe instead of functional composition, call it an array of functions that pass their return value to the next function in the array. Or a promise.