[Haskell-cafe] category design approach for inconvenient concepts

[Ertugrul Söylemez]

Mark Flamer <mark at flamerassoc.com> wrote:

> I have also become intrigued and confused by this "category theory"
> and how it relates to Haskell. It has been stated many times that you
> don't need to understand category theory to utilize the Haskell
> language but all the concepts, patterns and every paper describing
> them seems to be written by someone who understands it. It really
> appears that to "innovate" in this community it helps to at least have
> a basic understanding of the theory. I have started working through
> this book "Conceptual Mathematics, A first introduction to categories"
> and so far it seems very understandable and interesting for mere
> mortals like myself.

My experience is that you can very well innovate in this community
without understanding anything of category theory (CT).  The fun starts
when you realize that your concept, when sound, can most often be
expressed in the categorical framework, and if not, then your concept is
either unsound or can be improved by CT.

In other words, you can learn it along the way, and you do that best by
writing software and using well designed libraries.

For understanding CT itself my suggestion is that you don't try too
hard.  The human mind is used to visualizing things, and except for an
abstract directed graph this fails terribly for CT.  That means, when
you feel stuck, chances are that's just a false feeling.


Greets,
Ertugrul

-- 
Not to be or to be and (not to be or to be and (not to be or to be and
(not to be or to be and ... that is the list monad.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20121220/70bc3a24/attachment.pgp>