I watched this video with already an idea of what monads are, and so I may have a different perspective than others about this. This being a more than 10-year-old video also changes how it sounds when watching it. I don't think this is a boring presentation. It is quite an old-fashioned way to present perhaps, but it does provide code examples. I can see what I have learned in Kotlin about monads completely reflected in this presentation even in current times and that makes it a good presentation in my view and I am very happy to have watched this.
Interested in the Actor Model: channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Hewitt-Meijer-and-Szyperski-The-Actor-Model-everything-you-wanted-to-know-but-were-afraid-to-ask ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7erJ1DV_Tlo.html
47:50 "Trying to save memory in Javascript... I can't imagine a bigger waste of time" I can, though. Sure, "premature optimization is the root of all evil", but a lot webapps, sites, and HTML5+css+js applications seriously need some love. It's both lazy and ethically questionable to keep pushing all the load to hardware requirements. Lazy because part of your job is to make things that work as intended now, not things that will probably work as the should in 2 years. Ethically questionable, because you put an arbitrary economic barrier to access. "Doesn't work in your computer? Buy a better one". Why? It's just a stupid gallery page that should work on any 10 years old computer! What that way of working does is to push the cost from the company making software to the user buying hardware.
Suggesting a slight change. The coloring should distinguish scopes. For example unit and value exist in different scopes ( at 18:00 ), but they're the same color in Doug's example.
This is the problem with every video I've seen about monads. They all start with: 'We're going to do a better job at explaining monads than every other video on youtube.', but then proceed to make the same fundamental mistake. Instead this is what they should do: 1) show a concrete example of the problem sttement, in the language that the viewer already knows, 2) show the viewer what the typical way to solve the problem, in the way that the reader would likely solve the problem on their own, 3) now tell them what the downside is with their solution and finally 4) show the viewer how monads solves the same problem without the downside.
I am sorry you have had to endure this. Mr Crockford clearly does not know what monad means. This leads to handwavy, non-explanations which confuse aspiring learners even more. I am happy to help you understand this concept, and its practical application, concretely if you would like.
What is really funny is that today, once again, I decided to finally understand monads. So I was reading a blog post which pointed me to this video. After realising that I still had no clue as to what monads are, I decided to read the comments and saw yours. I wanted to give it a like and realised that I already did, probably some time in the past when I, again, tried to understand monads. My understanding so far is that monads must have something to do with recursion.
Anyone still having trouble understanding monads, I wrote a really good tutorial that starts from the ground up (you *can't* start with a box/bag/burrito metaphor, that's a mistake) and explains everything in plain English without the heavy mathematics or Haskell: gist.github.com/fatcerberus/beae4d15842071eab24fca2f0740c2ef Crockford couldn't break the curse, but I'm pretty sure I can.
Has the ...args "splat" feature been implemented in newer versions of ECMAScript, then? (Or maybe he's joking?) Edit: He's talking about it around 24:11
+Miyalys Sign Yup. It's in latest versions of Gecko and V8. developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Spread_operator#AutoCompatibilityTable
+Pangea Minor Yes thanks god but the code has other bugs for example the simplest, first version of MONAD should be function MONAD() { return function unit(value) { var monad = Object.create(null); monad.bind = function(func) { func(value); return this; }; return monad; }; } so that monad.bind(foo).bind(bar) actually works im gonna fix this stuff and put it on github or something
really interesting video. It would be even better without the stereotyping of Spanish speaking people. You can learn Spanish to talk to business partners, to talk to collaborators across the world, not only to "your workers". You were just shy from saying "you can learn Spanish to talk to your maid or your gardener." Just saying.
Michael Dougherty It was so distracting I nearly stopped listening to the whole thing. He says the same thing in his Google Techtalk, so it's scripted rather than off the cuff. How disconnected do you have to be to think that that comment isn't totally asshatish?
I have attempted to take his code and put it in a library and extend it to be more useful. github.com/scottburch/functional I think it has a simpler explanation since I don't go into the details of the code itself. Any feedback is welcome.
Excellent explanation. For the part where Crockford discusses the MayBe monad, and passing that into the MONAD constructor (mins. ~28) he left out a critical code slide to actually illustrate that the MONAD receives such a modifier parameter. It would look something like var MONAD = function (modifier) ... further down if (typeof modifier === 'function') { modifier(monad, value); } in order to actually invoke it. Otherwise very clear and simple explanations.
Nice talk. However I disagree about the part about incorporating user comments into the documentation (the PHP way): Evan Goer highly underestimates the power of seeing the process of ideas being discussed, and actually seeing crappy ideas being rejected and on which grounds. In fact I think YUI documentation would take great benefit if users where able to write comments to the single methods and properties telling how they use them in practice. Lots of simple and repetitive questions would be avoided in the forum, a lot of frustration of first time users would be dispelled because they would get an immediate sense of how people actually use those methods, in practice, in a way that even tutorials cannot accomplish, and with a much lower effort from the part of the core developers. They could instead use a bit of effort to correct or comment on some comments to put things straight when needed.
I been working on the "Scroller" (60fps everywhere) that will work across-devices and for every use-case, so stay tuned on twitter for more updates! #perfmatters
I started out using Windows Expression Web, but moved on to Sublime after trying it. I would recommend Sublime, there are so many things you can do with it to make your coding faster and more efficient, it's amazing. There are some good tutorials on RU-vid that show you how to use some of it's many features too.
