Thanks for pointing that out. The author didn't emphasize that point, and it makes sense now.
Is it me, or was it a bad example for where Haskell "really shines"? I don't like the "use Haskell cause it has these really cool functions" approach. Feels so superficial.
Is it me, or was it a bad example for where Haskell "really shines"? I don't like the "use Haskell cause it has these really cool functions" approach. Feels so superficial.