-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Inconsistencies in types definitions #29
Comments
Functions are objects so it's not too much worry to me On Wed, Mar 23, 2016, 8:30 AM boris notifications@github.com wrote:
|
Not my point.
We all know that these two things are essentially the same but we should stick with one of them in order to be consistent (else a person who is reading the docs would presume that there is some difference between the two concepts. Another way that is more verbose but also clearer is to say both things. Something like... "A monoid is an object with a map method (or a separate function)..." Cheers everyone. |
I think we should say function instead of method. While methods can be On Fri, Mar 25, 2016, 1:45 AM boris notifications@github.com wrote:
|
All references to "method" have been removed from the document so I think we can call this resolved. |
The following two definitions are both correct, but they are inconsistent:
I don't know which of the two is better. The "object with some methods" style of definition, limits us in some ways, for example we cannot say "pure functions form a monoid under functional composition". The other one seems impractical. Maybe we should incorporate both.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: