> > So here's my question: how useful is h-99 (are they overrated as learning > tools)? I find myself solve most of them in a "from the scratch" fashion > (e.g., no Monad, no Applicative, no Functor aside from List and a few > Maybe). Some of them are paper-worthy, for example the prime problems. I > hope some guru-level Haskeller could do away the missing few, and maybe > dive deeper into the surface to produce more insights (like the knights > travel page or the sieve paper, which are both beautiful).
As another new-haskeller I say: Yes & No. "Yes" for necessity of several described algorithms and gained intuition for real programming. "No" for needed ammount of work to understand pitfalls of Haskell when real programming. And of-course, problems and solutions are not annotated with there typical real world aplications, they are not obvious for average beginners. Why would I make Binary tree balanced, when I don't know, what I'll gain (except balanced binary tree)?
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
