Home freenode/#haskell: Logs Calendar

Logs: freenode/#haskell

←Prev  Next→
Page 1 .. 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 .. 5022
— 502,152 events total
2020-10-21 22:29:24 <crestfallen> from understanding*
2020-10-21 22:29:33 → AceNovo joins (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net)
2020-10-21 22:29:36 <koz_> crestfallen: I would argue that, for understanding do-notation, this is a _terrible_ plan.
2020-10-21 22:29:43 <koz_> Do-notation is syntactic sugar.
2020-10-21 22:29:55 <koz_> If you want the semantics of a particular piece of do-notation, desugar it.
2020-10-21 22:30:07 × thir quits (~thir@p200300f27f19de00eca173dc7e5d6773.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2020-10-21 22:30:12 <koz_> That is 100% of the issue, and tying yourself in knots about it like this impedes your own understanding.
2020-10-21 22:30:42 → aidecoe joins (~aidecoe@unaffiliated/aidecoe)
2020-10-21 22:31:01 × heatsink quits (~heatsink@107-136-5-69.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net) (Remote host closed the connection)
2020-10-21 22:31:25 → Tops2 joins (~Tobias@dyndsl-095-033-090-095.ewe-ip-backbone.de)
2020-10-21 22:32:16 × Pitaya quits (~mdomin45@cpe-24-211-129-187.nc.res.rr.com) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
2020-10-21 22:32:31 <crestfallen> wow, ok thanks. like this I get: Just (Just a) >>= id ==> Just a
2020-10-21 22:32:48 <texasmynsted> wow. stan is working for me now. :-) It is really helpful
2020-10-21 22:33:02 <koz_> OK, then your only issue is that you have to stop thinking about do-notation as _anything_ other than syntactic sugar.
2020-10-21 22:33:17 <koz_> Literally, just go 'right, this is do-notation, let's manually desugar'.
2020-10-21 22:33:21 <koz_> And do this until it sticks.
2020-10-21 22:33:24 → Plantain joins (~mdomin45@cpe-24-211-129-187.nc.res.rr.com)
2020-10-21 22:34:20 × karanlikmadde quits (~karanlikm@2a01:c22:b046:2a00:218a:97bb:be49:dab9) (Quit: karanlikmadde)
2020-10-21 22:34:30 → whatisRT joins (~whatisRT@2002:5b41:6a33:0:61c5:a3a1:1437:ebe5)
2020-10-21 22:34:39 <crestfallen> koz_, while learning, I need to take any angle I can get. (>>= id) brought a lot of insight. so yeah I'm hung up on it presently :)
2020-10-21 22:35:05 <koz_> crestfallen: And I'm telling you that your attempt at angling is getting you _more_ confused.
2020-10-21 22:35:06 × britva quits (~britva@31-10-157-156.cgn.dynamic.upc.ch) (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
2020-10-21 22:35:20 <koz_> Literally, do-notation is syntax sugar. Nothing more, nothing less. Approach it as such, nothing else.
2020-10-21 22:35:40 <monochrom> do-notation doesn't desugar to join or >>=id.
2020-10-21 22:36:15 <crestfallen> someone on the channel told me to use >>= instead. not sure of the context of that chat, but I do prefer it somehow.
2020-10-21 22:36:28 × AceNovo quits (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net) (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
2020-10-21 22:36:40 <koz_> crestfallen: Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to use do-notation.
2020-10-21 22:36:52 <crestfallen> !! thanks
2020-10-21 22:36:54 → AceNovo joins (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net)
2020-10-21 22:36:57 → heatsink joins (~heatsink@107-136-5-69.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net)
2020-10-21 22:37:09 <monochrom> Preference is irrelevant. do-notation desugars to >>=. Not join, not >>=id.
2020-10-21 22:37:23 × p8m quits (p8m@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/p8m) (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2020-10-21 22:38:21 <crestfallen> well, if I could ask differently: is (>=>) just like bind, sans join?
2020-10-21 22:38:29 × Deide quits (~Deide@217.155.19.23) (Quit: Seeee yaaaa)
2020-10-21 22:38:46 <davean> sans join?
2020-10-21 22:38:47 <crestfallen> meaning >=> sans join
2020-10-21 22:39:11 <crestfallen> >=> doesn't implement join
2020-10-21 22:39:11 <monochrom> I refuse to talk about "like". Everything is like everything. Everything is also unlike everything else.
2020-10-21 22:40:57 <davean> Hum, in this case we're talking about something precise. We can say "A can be implimented with the same code as B, except lacking exactly the inclusion of a join"
2020-10-21 22:41:29 <koz_> monochrom is like koz_.
2020-10-21 22:41:50 <monochrom> http://www.vex.net/~trebla/humour/tautologies.html #0
2020-10-21 22:41:50 × chaosmasttter quits (~chaosmast@p200300c4a70942015d50de0935368812.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2020-10-21 22:42:33 <crestfallen> for example, this is lost on me:
2020-10-21 22:42:40 × tzh quits (~tzh@2601:448:c500:5300::19b0) (Quit: jsdkj)
2020-10-21 22:42:59 <crestfallen> λ > :t (>=> join)
2020-10-21 22:43:03 <crestfallen> (>=> join) :: Monad m => (a -> m (m (m c))) -> a -> m c
2020-10-21 22:43:19 <davean> monochrom: perhaps you'd prefer the question "What is the relation of (>>=) and (>=>) in regards to 'join'?"?
2020-10-21 22:43:27 <monochrom> Fortunately (>=> join) seldom comes up at all.
2020-10-21 22:43:44 <davean> I don't know why that would come up - thats a weird structure
2020-10-21 22:43:45 <crestfallen> davean thanks I need that terminology!
2020-10-21 22:44:08 × AceNovo quits (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net) (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
2020-10-21 22:44:25 → p8m joins (p8m@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/p8m)
2020-10-21 22:44:35 → AceNovo joins (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net)
2020-10-21 22:47:18 × AceNovo quits (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net) (Client Quit)
2020-10-21 22:47:23 <crestfallen> davean, if you care to look, this is from a bartosz tutorial: https://termbin.com/xnxfu
2020-10-21 22:47:23 × stefan-__ quits (~cri@42dots.de) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2020-10-21 22:47:41 → stefan-__ joins (~cri@42dots.de)
2020-10-21 22:47:44 → AceNovo joins (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net)
2020-10-21 22:47:48 × merijn quits (~merijn@83-160-49-249.ip.xs4all.nl) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
2020-10-21 22:47:50 <crestfallen> https://www.schoolofhaskell.com/user/Lkey/kleisli
2020-10-21 22:48:07 <davean> crestfallen: right and join takes 'm (m a) -> m a'
2020-10-21 22:48:58 <crestfallen> yeah that was helpful, I thought anyway :)
2020-10-21 22:49:01 <davean> Because of a property of m
2020-10-21 22:49:17 <davean> Its not helpful for me, and I'm unclear why its helpful for you which worries me but :)
2020-10-21 22:49:18 <koz_> Is there such a thing as mapMaybeM?
2020-10-21 22:49:34 <davean> koz_: yes?
2020-10-21 22:49:42 <davean> in a few packages
2020-10-21 22:49:49 <koz_> @hoogle mapMaybeM
2020-10-21 22:49:50 <lambdabot> Data.Conduit.List mapMaybeM :: Monad m => (a -> m (Maybe b)) -> ConduitT a b m ()
2020-10-21 22:49:50 <lambdabot> Control.Monad.Extra mapMaybeM :: Monad m => (a -> m (Maybe b)) -> [a] -> m [b]
2020-10-21 22:49:50 <lambdabot> Extra mapMaybeM :: Monad m => (a -> m (Maybe b)) -> [a] -> m [b]
2020-10-21 22:50:05 × xerox_ quits (~xerox@unaffiliated/xerox) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2020-10-21 22:50:13 <davean> You can easily compose it from base with catMaybes and mapM of course
2020-10-21 22:50:28 <davean> Which is generally what I do ... repeatedly
2020-10-21 22:50:33 <koz_> davean: Rofl.
2020-10-21 22:50:38 × AceNovo quits (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net) (Client Quit)
2020-10-21 22:51:01 → AceNovo joins (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net)
2020-10-21 22:51:41 × ukari quits (~ukari@unaffiliated/ukari) (Remote host closed the connection)
2020-10-21 22:51:51 <koz_> :t catMaybes
2020-10-21 22:51:52 <lambdabot> [Maybe a] -> [a]
2020-10-21 22:51:57 <koz_> (miaow)
2020-10-21 22:52:15 <davean> I just grepped, the occurencies of the obvious definition currently in my projects on this computer is depressing.
2020-10-21 22:52:20 <crestfallen> davean, helpful because m(m a) needs a flatten. so it led me to think if flatten is implicit in >>= alone. also because of seeing this notation which implies that: do; ma <- mma
2020-10-21 22:52:28 × AceNovo quits (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net) (Client Quit)
2020-10-21 22:52:47 → ukari joins (~ukari@unaffiliated/ukari)
2020-10-21 22:52:49 × babygnu quits (~robert@gateway/tor-sasl/babygnu) (Remote host closed the connection)
2020-10-21 22:52:53 → AceNovo joins (~chris@67-42-33-191.phnx.qwest.net)
2020-10-21 22:53:11 → dansho joins (~dansho@ip68-108-167-185.lv.lv.cox.net)
2020-10-21 22:53:30 <davean> er ...
2020-10-21 22:53:42 <davean> So try desuggering what actually happens there.
2020-10-21 22:54:09 <crestfallen> thanks ko*z suggested that but I'm not sure what to do..
2020-10-21 22:54:22 <davean> Also, if you think of it as "flattening" its one *very* specific notion of that at best.
2020-10-21 22:54:48 <crestfallen> thanks that's helpful
2020-10-21 22:54:50 <davean> Not saying you're entirely off base, but I think that conceptualization will lead you astray
2020-10-21 22:55:22 <davean> crestfallen: so you've never seen how "do" desugars?
2020-10-21 22:56:08 <crestfallen> davean I'm reviewing some stuff after a long and difficult absence from learning. not sure
2020-10-21 22:56:48 <crestfallen> pretty straightforward, I guess?
2020-10-21 22:56:52 <davean> EXTREMELY
2020-10-21 22:56:57 <davean> crestfallen: you might want to look at the Haskell Report
2020-10-21 22:57:05 <davean> it isn't very long and its very clear and covers all the sugar
←Prev  Next→
Page 1 .. 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 .. 5022

All times are in UTC.