▲ | fooker 9 days ago | |||||||
Parser combinators are already mainstream. All/most real languages are implemented with hand written recursive descent parsers that closely resemble parser combinators, or at the very least borrow a bunch of concepts. It's the name that's unlikely to become mainstream. That's squarely upon FP folks giving sci-fi names to common sense concepts. | ||||||||
▲ | antonvs 9 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
Presumably you're not objecting to the word "parser". What name would you use for "combinator"? It's a pretty simple word, based on the root "combine". The common sense concept here is functions whose results depends only on their arguments, which makes them well-suited for being used in "combination" with other combinators, as in `f . g` or `f(g(x))`. That's called function composition, which can be defined as the act of combining functions. It's a term that has existed in logic for over a century, from before computers existed. It seems to me that no amount of renaming of terms will fix people's lack of curiosity or lack of desire to learn or understand. That's on them. | ||||||||
|