
As the name implies, the concept of an applicative functor builds on the
concept of a functor, so it will help to start with a thorough
understanding of functors.
A functor allows you to lift a function of Foo -> Bar into some context of
Foo, so that when the expression is finally evaluated you will end up with
a value of Bar in that context. An applicative functor allows you to lift a
function of an arbitrary number of parameters, such as Foo -> Bar ->
Baz, into that number of values (of those types) already in contexts. So
the example function could be applied to a context of Foo and a context of
Bar, and would ultimately evaluate to a context of Baz.
e
On Sunday, October 19, 2014, Frank
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.
On Sunday, October 19, 2014, Karl Voelker
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','karl@karlv.net');> wrote: I suggest that you ignore applicatives for now and just focus on plain-old functors. They are the simplest part, and once you are confident in dealing with them, adding on applicatives will be much easier.
And, although it can be difficult when you are really lost, if you can ask some more specific questions, this list will provide plenty of answers.
-Karl
On Oct 18, 2014, at 3:37 PM, Frank
wrote: I've had a go at LYAH and CIS 194 and the Typeclassopedia and I just don't get get functors and applicatives. I'm simply not understanding them, what the various symbols/keywords mean, what they represent, how to think of them, etc. Nothing. Is there any kind of documented model I should be considering? Is there a "functors and applicatives for Dummies" I should read? Should I just give it up, not bother with Haskell and just stick to scheme/ruby/C++?
-- P.S.: I prefer to be reached on BitMessage at BM-2D8txNiU7b84d2tgqvJQdgBog6A69oDAx6 _______________________________________________ Beginners mailing list Beginners@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
Beginners mailing list Beginners@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
-- P.S.: I prefer to be reached on BitMessage at BM-2D8txNiU7b84d2tgqvJQdgBog6A69oDAx6