Post AdhHBevup90TixVt6u by alexelcu@social.alexn.org
(DIR) More posts by alexelcu@social.alexn.org
(DIR) Post #AdhGjoeB79G9k7wLpo by deech@mastodon.social
2024-01-10T01:19:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
If this actually increases adoption, "FP" deserves to vanish from memory.https://nitter.net/ChShersh/status/1744633907566235932
(DIR) Post #AdhGjqCbKeOAZB3M80 by alexelcu@social.alexn.org
2024-01-10T08:14:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@deech Names don't have anything to do with popularity.E.g., Monad is a terrible name, but it's not any worse than Thenable, which is cringy, yet in JavaScript nobody cares how these types implementing “then” are called.https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise#thenablesADTs and “sum types” in particular are confusing, as they get defined in contrast to product types, yet langs talk of dictionaries or classes. So languages should just define these in terms of what they already have (e.g. `sealed classes`, or enums).
(DIR) Post #AdhGjr6xx5TXNzQMz2 by deech@mastodon.social
2024-01-10T01:38:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Not that it's bad quite the contrary, but if after all this time there's so few success stories that you have to call sum types "choices" to get people to even consider it, it's probably time to turn out the lights or at least give up on appeasing your conception of the average developer. Don't worry there's always "secret weapon" rhetoric to cling to.
(DIR) Post #AdhHBevup90TixVt6u by alexelcu@social.alexn.org
2024-01-10T08:19:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@deech Also, monads are difficult not because of the name, but because managing effects via monads is far from what mainstream languages are doing. To take full advantage of monads, you need an expressive type system that not many static languages have, or because of performance considerations.Monads have been losing to continuations or blocking I/O (AKA “direct style” in FP circles). Changing the name won't matter much, unfortunately, monadic effect systems will remain niche, IMO.