Difference between revisions of "Talk:Enumerator and iteratee"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: - introduces analogy and then says not to hold to the analogy too closely.. is this analogy that useful? perhaps it should be discarded. - makes use of fix to write recursive functions ea...) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | * introduces analogy and then says not to hold to the analogy too closely.. is this analogy that useful? perhaps it should be discarded. |
|
| + | :: I am the author of a big part of text and code. That analogy is not mine. Because somebody found it helping, I was reluctant to delete it. Delete that analogy (I agree) or link it somehow to remaining text. --[[User:Beroal|beroal]] 20:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC) |
||
| − | + | * makes use of fix to write recursive functions easily, but that might be a stumbling block for less experienced programmers |
|
| ⚫ | |||
| + | :: It depends on background (a textbook). Introducing recursion with the fixed point combinator IMHO is more elementary than with recursive @let@. --[[User:Beroal|beroal]] 20:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC) |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| + | :: "it works exactly like a monadic parser". I supposed that [[monadic parser]] would be written shortly after that, but that did not happen. :) (Or is there a suitable article, but with another name?) In short: @fmap f@ passes an output message via @f@ (@Next g -> Next (rc . g)@ just wraps the automaton given as argument); @return x@ is an automaton that finishes immediately and yields @x@; @it0 >>= it1@ runs @it0@ until it finishes yielding @x@, then runs @it1 x@. --[[User:Beroal|beroal]] 20:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC) |
||
Latest revision as of 20:33, 26 August 2011
- introduces analogy and then says not to hold to the analogy too closely.. is this analogy that useful? perhaps it should be discarded.
- I am the author of a big part of text and code. That analogy is not mine. Because somebody found it helping, I was reluctant to delete it. Delete that analogy (I agree) or link it somehow to remaining text. --beroal 20:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
- makes use of fix to write recursive functions easily, but that might be a stumbling block for less experienced programmers
- It depends on background (a textbook). Introducing recursion with the fixed point combinator IMHO is more elementary than with recursive @let@. --beroal 20:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
- monad,functor,category discussion is very terse..
- "it works exactly like a monadic parser". I supposed that monadic parser would be written shortly after that, but that did not happen. :) (Or is there a suitable article, but with another name?) In short: @fmap f@ passes an output message via @f@ (@Next g -> Next (rc . g)@ just wraps the automaton given as argument); @return x@ is an automaton that finishes immediately and yields @x@; @it0 >>= it1@ runs @it0@ until it finishes yielding @x@, then runs @it1 x@. --beroal 20:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC)