æʃliŋ, f4f enthusiast @aescling@cat.family

@Lady i don't need to leave the apartment fur that

@coriander sure but still looks reasonable to me

@coriander i mean i would but

@coriander i almost named it tribbons (tiny ribbons) and then realized i was accidentally being very crass

@coriander little ribbons

it’s still raining. how the fuck am i supposed to go on a long walk with my xxs sylveon ​

@wallhackio fair

@wallhackio we are watching a movie

@wallhackio .bind chaining

@monorail

[verse 2: turning machine. it uses a british accent]
when it comes to the languages you inspired, their adoption has been quite weak
and their syntax is bizarre! seems like, greek to me!

alternatively just use a global size variable; we can abuse statefulness fur the funny

class Monorail {
  #value;
  #size = 1;

  constructor(value) {
    this.#value = value;
  }

  bind(f) {
    const newThis = f(this.#value);

    if (newThis.#size < this.#size + 1) newThis.#size = this.#size + 1;
    console.log(`the glaceon is now ${newThis.#size} meters tall`);
  return newThis;
  }
};

ill accept that typo that's funny

the monorail monad. every time you bind it logs that the shiny glaceon has gotten a little big larger

@monorail you can build an interface around a list such that everything using that interface is purrfurming non-deterministic computations, BUT, if you do arbitrary shit to a list directly, you don’t have the guarantee that that abstraction will make any sense

@monorail yeah, not all use cases fur list make sense as a monad. this is actually why it's impurrtant imo to sepurrate the data type from a monad built around it

@Lady no?

@Lady seems to be working pretty ok fur alpine