typelevel/cats

Welcome! Got a question? Do you have -Ypartial-unification turned on? Other FAQs: http://typelevel.org/cats/faq.html

Gavin Bisesi

@Daenyth

that I think helps drive home the "iterator" aspect

Fabio Labella

@SystemFw

oh, that's interesting, i didn't realize that a lot of the links point back to gitter. great idea!

Eventually I will have to go and do a backup somewhere else, but I dread that time

Adam Rosien

@arosien

ThreadApp, please unroll (this gitter link)

Gavin Bisesi

@Daenyth

fabio needs to hire a gitter assistant to take his conversations and translate to blogs :)

Fabio Labella

@SystemFw

tbh for some things I quite like the conversational format (although others would be better served by a proper exposition)

I worry more about gitter getting shutdown at brief notice

Gavin Bisesi

@Daenyth

I learn and internalize the things I teach better, in conversation, than trying to lecture

At least gitter is indexed on google

Some option to grab archives from there

Fabio Labella

@SystemFw

oh yeah still miles better than the proposed alternatives (which is why I opposed migrating to Discord or Slack)

Nathaniel Fischer

@kag0

https://typelevel.org/cats/datatypes/either.html#solution-2-adts-all-the-way-down talks about error ADTs, what's SOP for common errors that you want to share across modules?

Nick Telford

@nicktelford

Is there anything stopping cats from defining typeclass instances for SeqMap? It's useful for preserving the ordering of the mapping.

Jasper Moeys

@Jasper-M

Is there some well known name for this method foo?

def foo[A, B, C](f: A => B)(g: (A, B) => C): A => C =
  a => g(a, f(a))

Fabio Labella

@SystemFw

@Jasper-M that seems equivalent of Applicative.ap for F = A =>, with uncurrying and tuple == parameter lists

but it's not worth writing it differently than what you have I don't think

you can notice by changing (A, B) => C into A => B => C

then factorising the whole signature into (A => B) => (A => (B => C)) => (A => C)

then abstracting A => into F[_]

F[B] => F[B => C] => F[C]

and then alfa-rename and switch order into

F[A => B] => F[A] => F[B], which is the key signature of the Apply typeclass

Fabio Labella

@SystemFw

for F[E] = E => *

(renamed some type variables for clarity)

Jasper Moeys

@Jasper-M

Thanks! I felt like there had to be some cats concept for this

Fabio Labella

@SystemFw

one of the key soft skills is an eye for spotting F[_] patterns

in particular the starting point could have have swiping f and g and noticing basically (A => B) => (A => C)

that should trigger your functorial warning, since functor, applicative and monad can all be seen to transform things into F[B] => F[C]

although it's easier to rename things to F[A] => F[B] for consistency with the way things are usually written down

map: (A => B) => (F[A] => F[B])
ap: F[A => B] => (F[A] => F[B])
flatMap: (A => F[B]) => (F[A] => F[B])

Jasper Moeys

@Jasper-M

one of the key soft skills is an eye for spotting F[_] patterns

I'll tell that to my manager when he starts about communication and presenting

Fabio Labella

@SystemFw

which also helps with understanding that the real difference between power in the three typeclasses reflects the difference in power between A => B (uneffectful), F[A =>B](effectful but no context sensitivity) and A => F[B] (the effect can depend on the output of the previous computation, since A => F

I'll tell that to my manager when he starts about communication and presenting

ahahhaha :+1:

Adam Rosien

@arosien

traverse: (A => G[B]) => (F[A] => G[F[B]])

(kind of like flatMap wooo)

https://typelevel.org/cats/datatypes/either.html#solution-2-adts-all-the-way-down talks about error ADTs, what's SOP for common errors that you want to share across modules?

i think usually you have a separate ADT that is shared across modules. if you can have direct dependencies, then the upper ADT can refer directly to the module error types. otherwise you can cast or translate the module errors into something like Throwable which the upper ADT wraps

Nathaniel Fischer

@kag0

@arosien thanks, that makes sense. I was thinking of doing the opposite - having service specific errors extend common errors. but that just seemed messy.

Adam Rosien

@arosien

agreed!

you probably don't need it, and it's more complicated, but you could have a typeclass that translates "lower" level errors into a "higher" level error, but that means the higher level error loses information (which may be ok)

Nathaniel Fischer

@kag0

that could be interesting
I was already thinking of having a chain of causes similar to exceptions, so details could be retained that way

Soren

@srnb_gitlab

This just means that for a foo: Foo => Bar I can get a mFoo: M[Foo] => M[Bar], right?

(H is a monad)

Soren

@srnb_gitlab

Also, does "[a] monad on the category of something" mean that something is a Monad? (I don't know a lot of the notation and terminology for all of this)

Ryan Peters

@sloshy

@srnb_gitlab yes. Consider the age-old "a Monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors" for another example

Soren

@srnb_gitlab

@sloshy Cool. I'm implementing the H monad from https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.09408.pdf now

And I think I get most of it

Unfortunately its easier to implement map and flatten than flatMap

Soren

@srnb_gitlab

@sloshy Am I misreading or does the H monad only define the pure operation over directed hypergraphs?

Soren

@srnb_gitlab

Nevermind, I forgot that I can represent any value as a unary sourced hypergraph

What do I do when I don't think its possible to implement tailRecM?

Where communities thrive

People

Repo info

Activity