The "algebraic" in "algebraic effects" is not really related to algebraic data types, or sum or product types. I mean, I suppose they're related, since they both refer to algebra in the general sense, but there's no type-level algebra in a description of algebraic effects. (and, I suppose, you could do some type-level algebra with effects, like taking the "sum" of two effects, but again that's not what the "algebra" in "algebraic effects" is referring to)
> The big underline, though, is getting people to realize what algebra there is is not on the values that your code represents.
This is not correct. In the case of algebraic effects, the algebra is absolutely value-level.
> The big underline, though, is getting people to realize what algebra there is is not on the values that your code represents.
This is not correct. In the case of algebraic effects, the algebra is absolutely value-level.