Ingest, store, & analyze all types of time series data in a fully-managed, purpose-built database. Keep data forever with low-cost storage and superior data compression. Learn more →
Monadless Alternatives
Similar projects and alternatives to monadless
-
-
-
InfluxDB
Access the most powerful time series database as a service. Ingest, store, & analyze all types of time series data in a fully-managed, purpose-built database. Keep data forever with low-cost storage and superior data compression.
-
-
Formality
A modern proof language [Moved to: https://github.com/kind-lang/Kind]
-
-
-
-
SonarQube
Static code analysis for 29 languages.. Your projects are multi-language. So is SonarQube analysis. Find Bugs, Vulnerabilities, Security Hotspots, and Code Smells so you can release quality code every time. Get started analyzing your projects today for free.
-
-
-
NOTE:
The number of mentions on this list indicates mentions on common posts plus user suggested alternatives.
Hence, a higher number means a better monadless alternative or higher similarity.
monadless reviews and mentions
Posts with mentions or reviews of monadless.
We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives
and similar projects. The last one was on 2021-08-11.
-
Kind: A Modern Proof Language
The `{..}` is from `RecordWildCards`.
I do like the omission of `let` and `where` in favor of just variable definitions. For monadic notation, instead of `get` and `return` I'd prefer something like https://github.com/monadless/monadless
The main problem with `do`-inspired monadic notation is that it forces monadic code to always be in A-normal form, which is pretty annoying. It'd be far nicer to allow for monadic code to look the same as normal code, just with say an extra brace (such as "IO { }") to indicate that you're inside a monad.
Well `RecordWildcards` has been around for 14 years... but even without it instead of `{..}` you'd just have `_`s. The main thing that is different is that your Kind example had nested case statements while your Haskell example tried to match everything on one shot, which makes for a non-equivalent comparison.
> Not sure how that could work, though. Idris had an interesting syntax, but IIRC it wasn't general.
I assume you're talking about idiom brackets for applicatives? The general syntax is given in something like https://github.com/monadless/monadless. The idea is to basically take async-await syntax and generalize it to any monad.
So e.g. your `Maybe` example (using `!` for the equivalent of `await` for concision) would look like
Maybe { -
Why asynchronous Rust doesn't work
> If anything, async-await feels like an extremely non-functional thing to begin with
It, like many other things, forms a monad. In fact async-await is a specialization of various monad syntactic sugars that try to eliminate long callback chains.
Hence things like Haskell's do-notation are direct precursors to async-await (some libraries such as Scala's monadless https://github.com/monadless/monadless make it even more explicit, there lift and unlift are exactly generalized versions of async and await).
-
A note from our sponsor - InfluxDB
www.influxdata.com | 21 Mar 2023
Stats
Basic monadless repo stats
4
268
0.0
about 1 month ago
monadless/monadless is an open source project licensed under Apache License 2.0 which is an OSI approved license.
SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews
SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives
www.saashub.com