X-Git-Url: http://lambda.jimpryor.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=lambda.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=topics%2F_week7_monads.mdwn;h=7d189e4dab6f44745624dfa6ad33228f1b9d43fe;hp=da0b0080792ed769b6e57c2acb0796651eedb1bc;hb=cbf542073af9c239529a144e017d9d540fb1de75;hpb=62abed25f0f396cd548b833805f4219cbdf79533 diff --git a/topics/_week7_monads.mdwn b/topics/_week7_monads.mdwn index da0b0080..7d189e4d 100644 --- a/topics/_week7_monads.mdwn +++ b/topics/_week7_monads.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ - + + Monads ====== @@ -7,7 +8,7 @@ The [[tradition in the functional programming literature|https://wiki.haskell.org/Monad_tutorials_timeline]] is to introduce monads using a metaphor: monads are spacesuits, monads are monsters, monads are burritos. We're part of the backlash that -prefers to say that monads are monads. +prefers to say that monads are (Just) monads. The closest we will come to metaphorical talk is to suggest that monadic types place objects inside of *boxes*, and that monads wrap @@ -16,22 +17,22 @@ any case, the emphasis will be on starting with the abstract structure of monads, followed by instances of monads from the philosophical and linguistics literature. -### Boxes: type expressions with one free type variable +## Box types: type expressions with one free type variable Recall that we've been using lower-case Greek letters -α, β, γ, ... to represent types. We'll +α, β, γ, ... as variables over types. We'll use `P`, `Q`, `R`, and `S` as metavariables over type schemas, where a type schema is a type expression that may or may not contain unbound type variables. For instance, we might have - P ≡ Int - P ≡ α -> α - P ≡ ∀α. α -> α - P ≡ ∀α. α -> β + P_1 ≡ Int + P_2 ≡ α -> α + P_3 ≡ ∀α. α -> α + P_4 ≡ ∀α. α -> β etc. -A box type will be a type expression that contains exactly one free +A *box type* will be a type expression that contains exactly one free type variable. Some examples (using OCaml's type conventions): α Maybe @@ -52,6 +53,8 @@ would write for the type of a boxed Int. +## Kleisli arrows + At the most general level, we'll talk about *Kleisli arrows*: P -> Q @@ -68,3 +71,106 @@ Note that the left-hand schema can itself be a boxed type. That is, if `α List` is our box type, we can write the second arrow as Int -> Int + +We'll need a number of classes of functions to help us maneuver in the +presence of box types. We will want to define a different instance of +each of these for whichever box type we're dealing with. (This will +become clearly shortly.) + +mid (/εmaidεnt@tI/ aka unit, return, pure): P -> P + +map (/maep/): (P -> Q) -> P -> Q + +map2 (/m&ash;ptu/): (P -> Q -> R) -> P -> Q -> R + +mapply (/εm@plai/): P -> Q -> P -> Q + +mcompose (aka <=<): (Q -> R) -> (P -> Q) -> (P -> R) + +mbind (aka >>=): ( Q) -> (Q -> R) -> ( R) + +mflipcompose (aka >=>): (P -> Q) -> (Q -> R) -> (P -> R) + +mflipbind (aka =<<) ( Q) -> (Q -> R) -> ( R) + +mjoin: P -> P + +The managerie isn't quite as bewildering as you might suppose. For +one thing, `mcompose` and `mbind` are interdefinable: u >=> k ≡ +\a. (ja >>= k). + +In most cases of interest, instances of these types will provide +certain useful guarantees. + +* ***Mappable*** ("functors") At the most general level, box types are *Mappable* +if there is a `map` function defined for that box type with the type given above. + +* ***MapNable*** ("applicatives") A Mappable box type is *MapNable* + if there are in addition `map2`, `mid`, and `mapply`. (With + `map2` in hand, `map3`, `map4`, ... `mapN` are easily definable.) + +* ***Monad*** ("composables") A MapNable box type is a *Monad* if there + is in addition an `mcompose` and a `join` such that `mid` is + a left and right identity for `mcompose`, and `mcompose` is + associative. That is, the following "laws" must hold: + + mcompose mid k = k + mcompose k mid = k + mcompose (mcompose j k) l = mcompose j (mcompose k l) + +To take a trivial (but, as we will see, still useful) example, +consider the identity box type Id: `α -> α`. So if α is type Bool, +then a boxed α is ... a Bool. In terms of the box analogy, the +Identity box type is a completly invisible box. With the following +definitions + + mid ≡ \p.p + mcompose ≡ \fgx.f(gx) + +Id is a monad. Here is a demonstration that the laws hold: + + mcompose mid k == (\fgx.f(gx)) (\p.p) k + ~~> \x.(\p.p)(kx) + ~~> \x.kx + ~~> k + mcompose k mid == (\fgx.f(gx)) k (\p.p) + ~~> \x.k((\p.p)x) + ~~> \x.kx + ~~> k + mcompose (mcompose j k) l == mcompose ((\fgx.f(gx)) j k) l + ~~> mcompose (\x.j(kx)) l + == (\fgx.f(gx)) (\x.j(kx)) l + ~~> \x.(\x.j(kx))(lx) + ~~> \x.j(k(lx)) + mcompose j (mcompose k l) == mcompose j ((\fgx.f(gx)) k l) + ~~> mcompose j (\x.k(lx)) + == (\fgx.f(gx)) j (\x.k(lx)) + ~~> \x.j((\x.k(lx)) x) + ~~> \x.j(k(lx)) + +Id is the favorite monad of mimes everywhere. + +To take a slightly less trivial (and even more useful) example, +consider the box type `α List`, with the following operations: + + mid: α -> [α] + mid a = [a] + + mcompose: (β -> [γ]) -> (α -> [β]) -> (α -> [γ]) + mcompose f g a = concat (map f (g a)) + = foldr (\b -> \gs -> (f b) ++ gs) [] (g a) + = [c | b <- g a, c <- f b] + +These three definitions are all equivalent. In words, `mcompose f g +a` feeds the a (which has type α) to g, which returns a list of βs; +each β in that list is fed to f, which returns a list of γs. The +final result is the concatenation of those lists of γs. + +For example, + + let f b = [b, b+1] in + let g a = [a*a, a+a] in + mcompose f g 7 = [49, 50, 14, 15] + +It is easy to see that these definitions obey the monad laws (see exercises). +