Richard A. O'Keefe writes:
(2) The mathematical background of Haskell is extremely important
for implementations. Some important data structures and
techniques are practical in large part because of the kinds of
optimisations that are only straightforward in a language that
has
On Oct 15, 2007, at 7:01 , Yitzchak Gale wrote:
But I think we are still at the stage where a programmer
who wants practical results is better off starting out
by learning how to use monads in practice, not by
delving into category theory.
No argument from a Haskell standpoint. Still, when
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will be impolite.
There was no need to.
Andrew Coppin wrote:
OK. I get the message. I'm unsubscribing now...
There was no need to.
Please, let's keep haskell-cafe a friendly place, as it's always been.
When someone posts inaccurate (or even wrong) facts:
Attack
Roberto Zunino writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Andrew Coppin wrote:
OK. I get the message. I'm unsubscribing now...
There was no need to.
Please, let's keep haskell-cafe a friendly place, as it's always been.
Yes.
I would add, friendly and USEFUL, as it's always been. It was not
jerzy == jerzy karczmarczuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
jerzy But, when J. Vimal threateneds us to throw away Haskell,
jerzy complained about monads, and most people confirmed that the
jerzy underlying theory is difficult, ugly, and useless, I began
jerzy to read those
On 15 Oct 2007, at 5:41 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But, when J. Vimal threateneds us to throw away Haskell,
complained about
monads, and most people confirmed that the underlying theory is
difficult,
ugly, and useless, I began to read those postings with attention,
since
I disagree with
G'day all.
Quoting Richard A. O'Keefe [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
(5) Precisely because it seeks generality, category theory seems
difficult to concrete thinkers. And books on category theory
tend to be extremely fast-paced, so ideas which are not in themselves
particularly esoteric (which
G'day all.
Quoting Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I would really like to see category theory for the working
*non*mathematician.
It's pricey, but your local university library probably has it:
http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521478175
Cheers,
