/explore
|
You are here 
|
cronokirby.com | ||
| | | | |
bartoszmilewski.com
|
|
| | | | | In the previous instalment of Category Theory for Programmers we talked about the category of types and functions. If you're new to the series, here's the Table of Contents. You can get real appreciation for categories by studying a variety of examples. Categories come in all shapes and sizes and often pop up in unexpected... | |
| | | | |
www.jeremykun.com
|
|
| | | | | A lot of people who like functional programming often give the reason that the functional style is simply more elegant than the imperative style. When compelled or inspired to explain (as I did in my old post, How I Learned to Love Functional Programming), they often point to the three "higher-order" functions map, fold, and filter, as providing a unifying framework for writing and reasoning about programs. But how unifying are they, really? | |
| | | | |
rachelcarmena.github.io
|
|
| | | | | Some characteristics of functional programming | |
| | | | |
www.chriswarbo.net
|
|
| | | [AI summary] A discussion thread clarifying misconceptions about state, the IO monad, and functional purity in Haskell by explaining how the language represents imperative programs as pure data structures. | ||
