2010/1/22 Raul Miller <[email protected]>:
> I already understand laziness, I think I was first exposed
> to that concept nearly 20 years ago.

I have no doubt that you do.  I was just pointing out to an
example of how inadequate is that tutorial as introductory,
which it claims to be.  And there is all evidence that most
other language facets are just as poorly explained.

> What I lack is the ability to construct programs to test my
> understanding of concepts.  Once I have a framework to
> test ideas in I think I will be able to pick up concepts faster.
> ..........
> No matter how I start, I am going to have concepts around the
> edges which I do not understand.  That is a given.  But if I
> can see things in operation, I can reject huge classes of
> misunderstandings rather quickly.

In that respect I do believe that ‘Real world Haskell’ would be
more useful: it is practical, and (I think) it helps avoiding
misunderstandings much better that the ‘48’ tutorial.

> … And I also know how to program in some other languages.

Yes but, again, I was only pointing by this example to how
misleading the tutorial may turn to be.  I see it much more as
an advanced, documented practical exercise for people who know
Haskell, more or less, rather than an aid for learners of any
kind.  But of course it's your choice to prefer it or not for
what you are doing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to