Site operation discussions
I just posted my XML 2005 submission about XLinq on my homepage.
It describes the XLinq API in somewhat detail, and informally explains the relationship between LINQ and monads.
skimming through it I thought "wow, these guys really like everything New"
It'd be useful to have a reminder of the algebraic
definition of monoids, to see how lists, arrays
fit the definition. It's in the title, yet the
connection is not explained. I believe you meant
that monoids are the key to compositionality,
though that's never made explicit.
My brain splatted on the VB syntax in section 4.1.
Maybe putting the equivalent Haskell side-by-side
In the same section, the phrase "or indeed as monadic
bind", is meant to apply only to the List monad, right?
Of course, PLT Scheme's X-expressions achieve
greater notational economy than even the VB XML
literals. You could just use null or void for the
holes. Good to see that VB is trying to catch-up,
Aside: "My brain splatted on the VB syntax in section 4.1. Maybe putting the equivalent Haskell side-by-side
would help." That struck me as quite funny (in a good way) because statisically speaking, most anywhere else on Earth a) that would make no sense to anybody and b) if it did, the would beg for VB syntax when presented with snippets of Haskell!