Thanks for the suggestions Raul, I certainly could put a quick explanation of monadic for J in the video description and also in the lab version it can easily be put into the supporting text as you move through the lab.
Do you think that there is enough of a distinction here that there should actually be a video that explains these differences in the way that term monadic is interpreted across the different languages? Something along the lines of what I did for the more generic video on items. If so, can you point in me in a good direction to look for information on this. You have mentioned Haskell, are there other languages that should be taken into account? Do all functional languages have a more or less common view of monadic? I know from the number of blogs explaining monads a few years ago that there was a lot of confusion on this. What do you think? Cheers, bob > On Jun 3, 2019, at 8:27 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > (2) I would make one minor change (maybe written in the description > section instead of editing a new video): I would mention J when > talking about monadic verbs. (The reason for this is the conflicting > concept of "monad" introduced by the haskell community. All J verbs > are already sort-of monads (the Array monad) in that sense, just as > all Haskell functions are sort-of monadic in the J verb sense...). > This will matter to some newcomers to the language. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
