04:55 <discocaml> <mat23.55_33579> hello

05:19 <discocaml> <tri4004> hi, does Ocaml support monad transformer first class as in Haskell? I know there is the monad library implementing monad transformer, but would people use it regularly, or they would avoid using it until really need it? Like I would imagine people using Haskell live and breathe in monad and monad transformer with do notation everywhere, is Ocaml the same in that aspect? I mean last I check, there is no native equivalent of Haskell do-notation

05:19 <discocaml> <tri4004>

05:19 <discocaml> <tri4004> The reason I ask is, I come from F#, and F# doesn't natively support monad and monad transformer natively like Haskell. There is computation expression in F#, which is the do-notation version of Haskell, but it's only implemented for the async monad out of the box, implementation for other monads like Option and Result (Maybe and Either equivalent in Haskell) are left to 3rd party libraries. So F# is indirectly saying "it's doable, but we'd di

05:19 <discocaml> <tri4004> So, with F# being the implementation of Ocaml on .NET, does Ocaml take the same stance? That is, Ocaml doesn't dive deep into functional concept like Haskell, but these monads are there if people need it, like in F#. Or it's just F# deliberately dumb things down?

05:19 <discocaml> <tri4004>

05:19 <discocaml> <tri4004> I'm asking because I strive to write F# as Haskell as much as I could, with lots of monad and monad transformer, and try to avoid OOP and mutation as much as possible, but sometimes i think I'm being too idealistic trying to replicate Haskell in F#. And the best way to answer my question is to confirm if Ocaml also shy away from these monad concepts like F# or not, because I consider Ocaml to be a true functional language which F# derives from

06:04 <dh`> what is your goal in chasing after monad transformers?

06:04 <dh`> do you have a use case, or are you seeking ideological compliance?

09:14 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> ocaml probably is a “lighter version of FP”. ocaml is multi paradigm and haskell is confusing

09:16 <olle> I'm against the notion that only "pure" fp is "true" fp ^^'

09:25 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> ocaml has side effects, OOP and enough imperative features that make “purity” not worth worrying about imo as long as you can still write idiomatic functional code

09:26 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> there is this though - https://github.com/Denommus/monadic

09:26 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> i’ve never used monad transformers so idk how it compares

11:14 <discocaml> <contextfreebeer> Typed algebraic effects will probably make use of monads to manage effectful computation even less relevant, but I think the main reason OCaml doesn't use monads as heavily as Haskell is probably lack of typeclasses

13:56 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> has anybody got an example of real world effects use outside of schedulers

14:00 <companion_cube> tbh effects were added to multicore _for_ schedulers…

14:07 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> i know lol, just curious

14:08 <companion_cube> in theory you can also use them for inversion of control

14:08 <companion_cube> write a `iter` function (e.g. on a complex tree type)

14:08 <companion_cube> get a sequence/generator out of it

14:12 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> i've seen instances in my own code where they may be useful, but only in situations where i have a lot of code all of which can be genericised

14:27 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> anybody using ppx_yojson_conv? ppx_deriving_yojson's readme recommends switching, but i can't get on with it

14:28 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> is there any real advantage

14:29 <discocaml> <deepspacejohn> I've experimented with using effects to manage state. It seemed to work well although I only used it for a small project. it was a lot nicer than passing around a state value in each function, and I didn't need to use any mutation/global state.

15:14 <discocaml> <regularspatula> ive used the ppx_yojson_conv...works fine--though i get the impression that you don't need to switch old projects over necessarily

15:28 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> yeahh

15:41 <discocaml> <purefunctor> Fromy my experience (migrating from PureScript), transformers aren't _really_ used in OCaml--there's monadic binding syntax but it's really only used in specific contexts (I've personally used it most w/ `Option`/`Lwt.t`), not as entire abstractions for the application

23:32 <discocaml> <limp.biskit> are there any database libraries for miou yet?