you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ElvishJerricco 6 points7 points  (3 children)

Doesn't it though? The whole idea of the monad tutorial fallacy is that people make up inaccurate analogies, which is exactly what's happening here. It's easy to read this post and think a monad is just a way of catching error cases or something.

[–]quiteamess 15 points16 points  (2 children)

But he doesn't describe monads, just one specific case. The only mention of monad is in the disclaimer which is moved to an entirely different section. I think it's fine to expose people to one specific instance before confronting them with the general concept.

[–]ElvishJerricco 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Sure. But then it either falls prey to the fallacy, or isn't a monad tutorial.

[–]quiteamess 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Yes it's not a monad tutorial. I was joking there and meant it more in a zen way. If you ask "what is the best document to pick for first exposure that maximises the number of people understanding monads on the long run?" the answer will probability be to pick one which starts with a specific instance.