Auke Booij
Haskell Engineer
Hasura
location_on Switzerland
Member since 4 months
Share
Auke Booij
Specialises In
Auke Booij’s expertise lies in the interface between theory and practice of functional programming. He has a PhD on the subject of Homotopy Type Theory and is currently a Haskell Engineer at Hasura, where he applies theoretical techniques to develop a next-generation data access layer.
Auke has lectured at the University of Birmingham, and taught programming both in academic and industrial settings. Through a patient, respectful approach, he helps engineers develop their own understanding and reach moments of insight.
-
keyboard_arrow_down
Interpret your monads! - Concrete Monads vs Monad classes
45 Mins
Talk
Intermediate
Concrete monads or monad classes? I’ll tell you why it often makes sense to jump around between these options, and where this comes from.
Monads are the central notion to encode a program with effects in Haskell. Nowadays, we often combine several monad transformers to create the desired effect stack, relying on mmorph to juggle effects as required. But in fact, monad transformers and monad morphisms are just as old as monads in functional programming, an idea first published in 1989.
We can still benefit from that old work. The core of this talk is to discuss monads which are initial objects in the sense of category theory. Practically, this means that such monads can be interpreted in a class of other monads. Perhaps the most well-known example of such initial monads is Either e, which can be interpreted in any monad that instantiates MonadError e, through the use of liftEither.
This general principle of monad interpretation is exactly what allows us to jump around between concrete monads and monad classes. Monad interpretation can sometimes give a free performance boost, and can be used to easily write Haskell Arrows code without Arrow syntax.
-
-
No more submissions exist.
