On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 09:51:33AM -0400, Frank wrote:
Thanks but I think this misses the point a bit. A some point in time, I will need an explanation about applicatives and teg supposedly best documentation (or at least the documentation I see advocated in numerous places) seems really bad at providing that explanation, a point I find worrisome. I know myself well enough to say becoming comfortable with functors will not make understanding applicatives any easier if the applicatives explanation is not clear and, right now, the explanation is not clear.
Applicatives are Functors, so a solid understanding of the latter is required to grasp the former. - Did you go through all the examples from Learn You a Haskell [1]? - Could you write the `instance Functor Tree` if asked? - There are instances like `Functor ((->) r)` and `Functor ((,) a)`; how do they behave? Could you rewrite them *not* to follow Functor laws? Once you feel comfortable with the more mind bending cases of Functor, Applicative will be way easier to understand. [1] http://learnyouahaskell.com/making-our-own-types-and-typeclasses#the-functor...