

YAMT: yet anoth monad tutorial - gtani
http://spbhug.folding-maps.org/wiki/MonadsEn
St petersberg Haskell users grp<p>(says Moin Moin / python-powered at page bottom)
======
schtog
After programming for a while in Haskell I can only say I feel a bit crippled
when using other languages (sure on the other hand sometimes I feel crippled
when using Haskell).

    
    
      * The typesystem is the best of both worlds, statically typed but with optional declarations and an interpreter that can tell you the types if you ask it.
    
      * Very expressive, short easy to read programs that are very composable and easy to refactor.
    
      * Faster than other interpreted languages except for some or most LISPs.

~~~
silentbicycle
Have you tried OCaml? All of the above points apply to it as well, though it's
worth noting that both are frequently compiled. (Several Lisp and Scheme
compilers exist, as well.)

I'm not trying to start an argument -- I'm interested in comparisons by people
reasonably familiar with both (i.e. people who get the type system). They
strike me as having very different communities and priorities, but using most
of the same tools to further them.

------
anamax
As the author points out, a significant fraction of folks who learn languages
with monads end up writing a monad tutorial.

What other language features (any language) trigger such behavior?

What does this behavior tell us about monads and/or such languages?

