Skip to main content

Home/ Haskell/ Group items tagged learning

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Javier Neira

Learning Haskell Notes - 0 views

www.ninebynine.org/...Learning-Haskell-Notes.html

haskell learning notes

shared by Javier Neira on 09 Dec 09 - Cached
  • 8. Functors
  • A "functor" is a structured collection (or container) type with a method (fmap) that accepts a method and applies that method to the members of the collection yielding an isomorphic collection of values of a (possibly) new type. Is this right?
  • Every monad is a functor, but not the other way around; a monad is a functor PLUS functions >>= and return satisfying some laws
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • a functor is a type constructor PLUS a function fmap satisfying some laws.
  • I think it's better to use existentials, as they let you define multiple instances for the same type.
  • People tend to forget that the major difference between ADT's and OO-style classes is really only that with a class you can have many instances in the same program simultaneously, whereas with an ADT you can have only one; but the ADT implementation is still interchangeable.
  • sequence :: Monad m => [m a] -> m [a]
J.A. Alonso

Apprendre Haskell vous fera le plus grand bien ! - 0 views

lyah.haskell.fr

libro haskell tutorial

shared by J.A. Alonso on 25 Sep 11 - No Cached
  • J.A. Alonso on 25 Sep 11
     
    Traducción francesa del libro "Learn You a Haskell for Great Good!".
Javier Neira

Learn You a Haskell for Great Good! - Types and Typeclasses - 0 views

learnyouahaskell.com/types-and-typeclasses

type classes haskell tutorial intro

shared by Javier Neira on 22 Dec 09 - Cached
  • That's why we can use explicit type annotations. Type annotations are a way of explicitly saying what the type of an expression should be. We do that by adding :: at the end of the expression and then specifying a type.
Javier Neira

Understanding Haskell Monads - 0 views

ertes.de/monads.html

haskell monads tutorial learning

shared by Javier Neira on 16 Dec 09 - Cached
  • The opposite of referentially transparent is referentially opaque. A referentially opaque function is a function that may mean different things and return different results each time, even if all arguments are the same.
  • a function that just prints a fixed text to the screen and always returns 0, is referentially opaque, because you cannot replace the function call with 0 without changing the meaning of the program.
  • n fact, a function, which doesn't take any arguments, isn't even a function in Haskell. It's simply a value. A number of simple solutions to this problem exist. One is to expect a state value as an argument and produce a new state value together with a pseudorandom number: random :: RandomState -> (Int, RandomState)
  • ...12 more annotations...
  • A general purpose language is almost useless, if you can't develop user interfaces or read files. We would like to read keyboard input or print things to the terminal.
  • We have seen that we can solve this problem by expecting a state argument. But what's our state? The state of the terminal?
  • We seem to have found a useful solution to our problem. Just pass the state value around. But there is a problem with this approach.
  • A very special feature of Haskell is the concept of generalization. That means, instead of implementing an idea directly, you rather try to find a more general idea, which implies your idea as a special case.
  • However, the traditional programmer never had to face generalization. At most they faced abstraction,
  • they are a very abstract structure, which allows implementing functionality at an incredibly general level.
  • Haskell [1] is a purely functional programming language. Functions written in it are referentially transparent. Intuitively that means that a function called with the same arguments always gives the same result.
  • askell takes another approach. Instead of passing the world state explicitly, it employs a structure from category theory called a monad.
  • They are an abstract structure, and at first it can be difficult to understand where they are useful. The two main interpretations of monads are as containers and as computations.
  • The ⊥ value is a theoretical construct. It's the result of a function, which never returns, so you can't observe that value directly. Examples are functions, which recurse forever or which throw an exception. In both cases, there is no ordinary returning of a value.
  • Now that Nothing is a valid result, our function handles all cases.
  • You have some computation with a certain type of result and a certain structure in its result (like allowing no result, or allowing arbitrarily many results), and you want to pass that computation's result to another computation.
1 - 12 of 12
Showing 20▼ items per page