[Haskell-cafe] IO is a bad example for Monads

[Tim Newsham]

> I haven't been following this thread closely, but would it be rude to suggest 
> that someone who doesn't want to put the effort into learning the (admittedly 
> difficult) concepts that Haskell embodies shouldn't be using the language? 
> Haskell was never intended to be The Next Big Popular Language.  It was 
> intended to be a purely functional language for people who want to use purely 
> functional languages and who are willing to learn new concepts if it enables 
> them to program in that  style.

This is at odds with the notion, popular on this list and other
haskell forums, that pure functional programming is the future.

Why is it that every time the topic of teaching basic concepts in
an easier way comes up there are always two or three replies that
say "should we bother?  lets filter out the idiots?"  These are
pointless and counterproductive.  Whether or not you like the idea
of lesser entities sullying your private, pure, functional programming
language, there are going to be a lot more people learning this
language, and there will be people trying to make it easier for them
to learn it.

> whatever.  That said, of course we should strive to have better teaching 
> materials, but there are a number of good IO/monad tutorials on the web.
[...]
> because it enables us to write programs more effectively (in many cases, at 
> least) than we can in other languages, but the learning curve is steep -- 
> there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Many of the best resources for learning Haskell are still academic
papers published by language researchers.   We've still got a long
long way to go...  Sure there's no shortcut to learning difficult
concepts, but right now its more of a nature hike than a freeway...

> Mike

Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/