Your tutorials are fantastic. Thank you for releasing them, they are a rare mix of theory and application that distils the essence of things. More TH-cam channels should embrace this method instead of duplicating concepts unnecessarily (as in the ‘tutorial’ culture).
Really liking this series and getting a lot out of it. This is the first where its started to go over my head. Will check out recommended resources and give it another go. Thank you for all of your Haskell content!
Your videos are truly great. This is the first one I didn't quite understand. I'll have to try to rewatch it and read the linked resources. As a request, are you planning to talk about the State monad or the Arrow class in the future? Thank you so much for your great videos, keep it up!
Thank you so much! Arrows might be a fitting topic for the next video acually! The State Monad will probably find it's way into a video (not as a single video, but as a side note somewhere!). Stay tuned! ;)
At 18:55, is this a bit misleading because putStrLn getLine is of type IO (IO ()) which doesn't really do anything unless you "join" the IO? To print, surely you need getLine >>= putStrLn? Many thanks for your vids btw!
At 10:00, you say that the tensor product is a functor, but maps objects of C. My understanding is that would be a morphism, not a functor? Or am I misunderstanding
this video is NOT about application. The codes given are just definitions and it is heavily based on describing something very abstract. Please do not waste your time.
9:20 maybe map f . map g , not map f (map g)
map (f . g) ?
Indeed, "map f (map g)" is incorrect. What I wanted to specify was "\x -> map f (map g x)".
Thanks for spotting that!
@@philipphagenlocher or map f . map g
I've been following your tutorial for like a week now. Probably one of the best tutorials for haskell. Thank you so much!
Your tutorials are fantastic. Thank you for releasing them, they are a rare mix of theory and application that distils the essence of things. More TH-cam channels should embrace this method instead of duplicating concepts unnecessarily (as in the ‘tutorial’ culture).
Really liking this series and getting a lot out of it. This is the first where its started to go over my head. Will check out recommended resources and give it another go. Thank you for all of your Haskell content!
How do you create your slides? With LaTeX? If you make it with code, could you please share them as well?
For the slides I use LibreOffice Impress. For syntax highlighting I use this extension: extensions.libreoffice.org/en/extensions/show/code-highlighter
Your videos are truly great. This is the first one I didn't quite understand. I'll have to try to rewatch it and read the linked resources.
As a request, are you planning to talk about the State monad or the Arrow class in the future?
Thank you so much for your great videos, keep it up!
Thank you so much!
Arrows might be a fitting topic for the next video acually! The State Monad will probably find it's way into a video (not as a single video, but as a side note somewhere!). Stay tuned! ;)
@@philipphagenlocher Great! Thank you!
marvelous, I loved those schemes in the beginning!! ❤❤🦊
At 18:55, is this a bit misleading because putStrLn getLine is of type IO (IO ()) which doesn't really do anything unless you "join" the IO? To print, surely you need getLine >>= putStrLn?
Many thanks for your vids btw!
Yeah, this works.
You can join it yourself with
join :: Monad m => m (m a) -> m a
join = (>>= id)
Control.Monad.join (putStrLn ((++) getLine getLine))
At 10:00, you say that the tensor product is a functor, but maps objects of C. My understanding is that would be a morphism, not a functor? Or am I misunderstanding
21:10
So a monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors?
Can I download these slides from somewhere?
Your tutorial awesome.
Can you suggest reference books related to this topic.
🔥thank you for the videos
What does "muT" mean? Mu is a natural transformation, while T is a functor. Does this T in muT mean id_T ?
Sorry to double comment. Are there sensible English pronunciations for $, , , **, and ?
$ - apply
- fmap
- applicative application
I don't use the rest at all
Drive by category theory😁
Bartosz has lectures on category theory TH-cam as well, very interesting
this video is NOT about application. The codes given are just definitions and it is heavily based on describing something very abstract. Please do not waste your time.