Hello Dan,
sorry, I did not mean to single you out, I love your stuff. But I can't
find the thread through it, I pretty much lack basics / fundamentals to
digest it. But I do see *power* and it bugs the crap out of me that I
can't grasp it yet.
One example was your response to my DSL posts on this list, where you
said that in a way ever/any? monad can be considered a DSL. At that time
I was totally unable to understand the sentence as such nor its
significance. I kinda was focused on the "finally tagless" approach from
Oleg for DSLs. Now that I do understand the significance of that
statement I try to really figure it out. Mostly it finally occurred to
me because of Heinrich Apfelmus's "Operational monad tutorial". Which I
have no means of comprehending either because he's using GADTs.
From your blog I got the impression that you focus on monads, but I may
have gotten that wrong. You seem to be able to take this a very long
way, without using much fancy type level arithmetic or elaborate class
schemes. That gives me hope in a way because so far I'm not happy with
serious type-level programming.
Right now I'm reading J. Hughes '95 paper "The design of a pretty
printing library" which I believe I can grasp, may even before the years
end.
Would you consider creating a "guide" through your blog, something like
"read this first, then that"?
Günther
Am 06.03.10 21:14, schrieb Dan Piponi:
Günther,
A shining example are Dan Piponis blog posts.
When you get stuck, post a comment saying where so that I can learn
what people find difficult.
On the other hand, I understand how intangible not-understanding can
be, so it can be hard to point to where the problem is.
--
Dan
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
