i came accross [this](twanvl.nl/blog/haskell...) really neat blog post earlier, where the FunList data type has a pretty non-obvious Functor instance
but what surprised me was: using `deriving Functor` on this definition just figures it out?? how???
i came accross [this](twanvl.nl/blog/haskell...) really neat blog post earlier, where the FunList data type has a pretty non-obvious Functor instance
but what surprised me was: using `deriving Functor` on this definition just figures it out?? how???
✅ flippy functor
✅ flippy functor
With love and admiration: Mathematicians must be stopped before the subject ouroborically consumes itself.
With love and admiration: Mathematicians must be stopped before the subject ouroborically consumes itself.
"No"
"No"
github.com/ocaml/RFCs/p...
github.com/ocaml/RFCs/p...
It's basically an answer to a problem I first ran into 23 years ago. Here's a thread about it on the caml-list.
inbox.vuxu.org/caml-list/10...
declarations dreamed up by the utterly deranged
declarations dreamed up by the utterly deranged
Sort of the way "functor", "applicative functor" and "monad" are modern power words for defining architecture.
Sort of the way "functor", "applicative functor" and "monad" are modern power words for defining architecture.
OCaml's notion of a functor is not the one from category theory, it is a higher-order module.
So we simply settled for "module function".
Furthermore we have documented them properly now. Thank you, @vlkpack.com!
OCaml's notion of a functor is not the one from category theory, it is a higher-order module.
So we simply settled for "module function".
Furthermore we have documented them properly now. Thank you, @vlkpack.com!