yesod

How does this compare to Yesod [1]? [1]: https://github.com/yesodweb/yesod

At least, I've never seen someone use the `$` operator and put the right operand without any spacing in between. Not only would it cause errors on activating Template Haskell because GHC would interpret it as a TH splice[1], but also it would be weird to read because one tends to use the `$` operator when they have a multi-term expression they would otherwise not want to parenthesize. For example, take a look at this line in Yesod[2]: $logInfo $ pack $ show (a, b, c) The one without a space is a Template Haskell splice and the ones with a space are using the function application operator. If logInfo didn't need to be expanded by Template Haskell and we deactivate that extension, we could write: logInfo $pack $show (a, b, c) But I doubt anyone would because the implied parentheses around those operators are: (logInfo) $((pack) $((s

The password store in Yesod contains nice documentation about how it works. I found it very enlightening and reassuring to read: https://github.com/yesodweb/yesod/blob/master/yesod-auth/Yes...

I would recommend Michael Snoyman's book on yesod (http://www.yesodweb.com/) to get a practical understanding specially from a crud perspective. I found this book to be very helpful: http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1230000000929/pr01.htm... For me, using yesod has been quite a revelation. All of the errors in db operations get caught during my cabal build. This link https://github.com/yesodweb/yesod/wiki/ghci is something i used to test my db code all within the repl cycle after setting some pg env variables. All in all, its way smoother than many other environments i have worked with.

Oh no that is all a little too pedestrian for me. I've moved my sights much higher now. These days I use template haskell and applicatives to generate HTML forms: https://github.com/yesodweb/yesod/wiki/Multi-select-field-po.... I'm all for applying theory to enrich the practice of programming but lets be reasonable here. Lists and Options existed way before anyone added monadic sugar on top of it as did mapping and filtering collections. I like category theory as much as the next guy but lets just pull back a little bit. Not everything needs to be point-free, functorial, and shapeless.

For people that like math, sure, why not. When implementing mathematical concepts, if you squint at Haskell code you can see the original formulas, which should make it easier for people used to this way of thinking. EDIT: I'm not implying it's useful just for programming "math stuff", after all, everything can be reduced to a mathematical problem - including game engines[1], web application frameworks[2], etc. [1] http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~pls/thesis/munc-thesis.pdf [2] https://github.com/yesodweb/yesod

the github repos says yes https://github.com/yesodweb/yesod