Difference between revisions of "Talk:MapReduce as a monad"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(monoid) |
Julianporter (talk | contribs) (→Monads) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Why is it mapreduce as a ''monad''? Map just requires Functor, and reduce sounds like `mappend`, so it'd just be MapReduce as a monoid. --[[User:Gwern|Gwern]] 20:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC) |
Why is it mapreduce as a ''monad''? Map just requires Functor, and reduce sounds like `mappend`, so it'd just be MapReduce as a monoid. --[[User:Gwern|Gwern]] 20:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
| + | |||
| + | Because the key point is that both Map and Reduce can be seen as monadic functions, and so then MapReduce is just a matter of repeated bind operations. Think of it as a generalised State monad. [[User:Julianporter|julianporter]] 21:16, 2 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 21:16, 2 April 2011
Monads
Why is it mapreduce as a monad? Map just requires Functor, and reduce sounds like `mappend`, so it'd just be MapReduce as a monoid. --Gwern 20:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Because the key point is that both Map and Reduce can be seen as monadic functions, and so then MapReduce is just a matter of repeated bind operations. Think of it as a generalised State monad. julianporter 21:16, 2 April 2011 (UTC)