I'm also a Haskell no-so-new-anymore-bie, and for me, understanding
monads was a question of first reading the available docs, especially
http://sigfpe.blogspot.com/2006/08/you-could-have-invented-monads-and.html
and http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/IO_inside,
plus reading the Haskell School of Expression <http://haskell.org/soe/>
book,
but mainly, creating some of the monad instances myself, step by step (I
started with a random number generator, and ended with the list monad).
I found this very useful, and I actually had to look many times to the
existing solution to get it right. It made me appreciate the genius
minds behind this. After a bit of practice, I can now use monads almost
as easy as I can write imperative C/C++/C# code, although I find this is
also the dangerous part of the do notation: you tend to forget the
beautiful pure functional implementation that is behind the scenes, and
start to think imperatively (again)...
If you want I can dig up my old source code where I converted a random
number generator from a purely functional approach to a monadic
approach, but I'm not sure reading it would help you, it's creating the
code yourself that will be useful I guess.
Good luck,
Peter Verswyvelen
avid48 wrote:
On 10/14/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I know that asking helpful humans is nicer than reading docs, but the latter
is usually more instructive, and often more efficient.
Sorry, but from my newbie point of view, I think the docs are
sometimes poor and lacking. After seeing the docs, I might want to ask
the list some explanation; if I get a reply pointing me back to the
doc, it doesn't help.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
