Talk:Monad (functional programming)
Latest comment: 19 years ago by MarSch in topic par function
This is actually the same as Monad (category theory). These should be merged. —Ashley Y 22:19, 2004 May 31 (UTC)
- They're not really the same thing: an explanation of Haskell's IO monad doesn't belong in an article on category theory, and a detailed explanation of monads in category theory isn't relavent to the average Haskell programmer. In addition, many standard Haskell monads aren't strictly speaking monads at all. I think it's probably best to keep the articles separate. Cadr 22:28, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
- Which Haskell monads are not monads in the CT sense? —Ashley Y 09:58, 2004 Jun 1 (UTC)
- It's not clear, actually, since the difference is only visible with the 'seq' function, which is considered slightly dubious anyway. More importantly, these are Haskell's monad laws that IO may or may not be properly living up to: the sense in which "monad" is used in Haskell is precisely the CT sense.
- If you think this should be a separate article, rename it "Monads in functional programming", rather than the () notation which suggests that it's a separate sense of the word.—Ashley Y 02:49, 2004 Jun 2 (UTC)
- OK, but it's still the case that the two articles cover very different information. I'm fine with it being renamed to Monads in functional programming. Cadr 14:15, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Rename (from "Monad (functional programming)") done. —Ashley Y 23:27, 2004 Jun 2 (UTC)
Er, the first sentence of the second para (and possibly more) looks like a copyvio from http://nomaware.com/monads/html/introduction.html#what --- I don't know the topic well enough to rephrase to eliminate this. Could someone who knows the topic look into this? thanks, jdb ❋ 06:00, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
par function
Why is the function called par? --MarSch 11:06, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
