Skip to content
DevMeme
1984 of 7590
The Functional Programmer's Ascent to Abstraction
FunctionalProgramming Post #2211 · source on Telegram

The Functional Programmer's Ascent to Abstraction

Description

A three-panel 'Tuxedo Winnie the Pooh' meme illustrating different levels of sophistication in functional programming. The first panel shows a regular Winnie the Pooh next to a simple Haskell-style lambda function: '(\x -> x^2 + x)'. The second panel features a more dapper Pooh in a tuxedo, alongside a more complex but equivalent function using function composition, applicative functors, and a fold: 'foldl1 (+) . ([id, (^2)] <*>) . (:[])'. The final panel displays the most sophisticated Pooh with a top hat and monocle, paired with an extremely terse, point-free applicative version: '(*) <*> (+1)'. All three code snippets compute the same mathematical function, f(x) = x² + x. The meme humorously critiques the developer's journey from writing clear, readable code to employing highly abstract, esoteric language features that are powerful but often sacrifice clarity for cleverness. It's a joke that resonates with senior engineers who have witnessed or participated in the tendency to over-engineer solutions with advanced theoretical concepts

Categories

FunctionalProgramming CodeQuality Languages DesignPatterns Architecture DeveloperExperience DX

Common Tags

FunctionalProgramming Haskell CodeObfuscation LanguageQuirks FunctionalProgrammingConcepts Syntax CodingHumor DeveloperMemes

Comments

38
Anonymous ★ Top Pick The final version is what you write after a sudden, life-altering epiphany about monoids. It's perfect, and only God and you understand why it works. Six months later, only God understands
  1. Anonymous ★ Top Pick

    The final version is what you write after a sudden, life-altering epiphany about monoids. It's perfect, and only God and you understand why it works. Six months later, only God understands

  2. Anonymous

    Haskell PR lifecycle: λx→x²+x ships, foldl1 (+) . ([id,(^2)] <*>) . (:[]) wins conference slots, (*) <*> (+1) earns you a 3 a.m. pager because elegance doesn’t answer on-call

  3. Anonymous

    The real sophistication is when you realize all three expressions compute x² + x, but only the last one makes your code review take three hours while everyone pretends to understand applicative functors

  4. Anonymous

    The evolution from lambda to point-free is like refactoring your resume: each iteration removes more explicit detail while somehow conveying you're more qualified. By the time you reach '(*) <*> (+1)', you've achieved peak Haskell - mathematically elegant, theoretically beautiful, and absolutely incomprehensible to your future self at 3 AM during an incident. It's the functional programming equivalent of wearing a monocle: technically superior, but everyone knows you're just showing off that you understand applicative functors

  5. Anonymous

    Pro tip: when '(\x -> x^2 + x)' becomes '(*) <*> (+1)', you’ve optimized for laws, not humans - Applicative (->) a impresses the typeclass, terrifies the on‑call

  6. Anonymous

    Refactor request: “make it point‑free.” So λx. x^2 + x became ((*) <*> (+1)); same semantics, higher categorical elegance, and the bus factor vanished alongside the variable

  7. Anonymous

    From algebra desk jockey to foldl aristocrat: Pooh abstracts your poly into operator chic

  8. @lowerkinded 5y

    i thought im the only subscriber who knows haskell

    1. @bit69tream 5y

      main :: IO () main = hPutStrLn "no"

    2. Deleted Account 5y

      I studied it

    3. @Ahmed_K_3301 5y

      U still don't understand monad

      1. @p4vook 5y

        monads are easy

  9. @romanovich_dev 5y

    Wtf?

    1. @doorhinge 5y

      +1

    2. @p4vook 5y

      Haskell

  10. @RiedleroD 5y

    I have no idea what that code does and that scares me

    1. @p4vook 5y

      well, it's basically a composition of two functions: f(y) = x * y and f(x) = x + 1

      1. @RiedleroD 5y

        thanks

      2. @p4vook 5y

        .

  11. @p4vook 5y

    lol

  12. @fdrov 5y

    Python 3.9 list comprehension?

    1. @cheese_hs 5y

      Python 9.3

      1. @bee_vie 5y

        Rather Python -3.9

        1. Deleted Account 5y

          Python 1939 go brrr

          1. @lord_nani 5y

            Can repeat

          2. @mvolfik 5y

            Python 3.6 not great not terrible

      2. @delimitry 5y

        😂😂😂

  13. @sharp_mechanix 5y

    wtf is that?

    1. @romanovich_dev 5y

      As per comments - Haskell

  14. @sharp_mechanix 5y

    looks like egyptian scripts

  15. @p4vook 5y

    Last example in here is a composition of two functions (+1) and (*)

  16. @FiveMetres 5y

    But why?..

  17. @lord_nani 5y

    lmaooooo, haskell

  18. Deleted Account 5y

    Common Lisp go brrr

  19. Deleted Account 5y

    Racket is cool too

    1. @bit69tream 5y

      #lang python go brrr

      1. Deleted Account 5y

        "listen here, you litte shit"

    2. @mvolfik 5y

      What is actually racket used for? My dad (also programmer) taught me absolute programming basics in racket, but that's where me and racked ended. I speak mostly python now

More like this

More like this in FunctionalProgramming →
FunctionalProgramming FunctionalProgramming Haskell
Lambda Calculus, but Make It Fashion

Lambda Calculus, but Make It Fashion

CS Fundamentals
Any Sophomore Can Handle This Compiler Algebra

Any Sophomore Can Handle This Compiler Algebra

FunctionalProgramming
Any Sophomore Can Monad This

Any Sophomore Can Monad This

FunctionalProgramming
Use J and K for navigation