

“Mostly functional” programming does not work - tosh
http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2611829

======
tree_of_item
Why the focus on monads? There are many other types that model effects, like
arrows.

Erik Meijer of course knows what he's talking about, but whenever I see
someone talking at length about the benefits of monads I can't help but feel
they're spouting a lot of nonsense about the currently fashionable buzzword.

I think the _wrong_ thing to do would be to convince users of other languages
to stop and say "should we be using monads here?" Monads are irrelevant, it's
just about being explicit with effects, so I wish the focus wasn't on monads.

------
tosh
You know you're dealing with Erik Meijer when you read words like these:

> […] developers should seriously consider a completely fundamentalist option
> as well: embrace pure lazy functional programming with all effects
> explicitly surfaced in the type system using monads.

