I think big reason for the temporary knowledge silos is that it's simple to look up concrete details (online, in books, etc.), but the higher one climbs the abstraction ladder, the tougher it is to find the closest concept that matches the idea one has.
Sometimes the more abstract concepts don't even have a name and are expressed by referring to more concrete realizations of the concept (similar to how hash/object are more concrete ideas originating from same higher concept).
From my experience, I find that learning Haskell has been especially challenging due to how it uses far more abstract concepts for general problem solving than any other language I've used. It's tougher to understand what exactly I should look up to express my idea in code.
But at same time, being based in category theory, it makes it simpler to navigate the high abstractions due to it's formality. That's how unique yet useful tools like Hoogle can exist.
I agree. In general, temporary knowledge is more accessible. I've been learning Polish for the last few years, and I burned myself time and again when I opened the grammar book too soon.
Haskell is mind-bending. Especially when coming from a background that wired one's brain according to a different paradigm. This was my experience. Luckily, I met people who encouraged me, and, to be honest, I had to work hard to internalize many concepts.
In my upcoming newsletter, I'm sharing a couple of links on the topic of permanent knowledge. Here they are, in case you feel like exploring more:
This is a great posts, thanks for sharing!
I think big reason for the temporary knowledge silos is that it's simple to look up concrete details (online, in books, etc.), but the higher one climbs the abstraction ladder, the tougher it is to find the closest concept that matches the idea one has.
Sometimes the more abstract concepts don't even have a name and are expressed by referring to more concrete realizations of the concept (similar to how hash/object are more concrete ideas originating from same higher concept).
From my experience, I find that learning Haskell has been especially challenging due to how it uses far more abstract concepts for general problem solving than any other language I've used. It's tougher to understand what exactly I should look up to express my idea in code.
But at same time, being based in category theory, it makes it simpler to navigate the high abstractions due to it's formality. That's how unique yet useful tools like Hoogle can exist.
Thank you for the comment Valts!
I agree. In general, temporary knowledge is more accessible. I've been learning Polish for the last few years, and I burned myself time and again when I opened the grammar book too soon.
Haskell is mind-bending. Especially when coming from a background that wired one's brain according to a different paradigm. This was my experience. Luckily, I met people who encouraged me, and, to be honest, I had to work hard to internalize many concepts.
In my upcoming newsletter, I'm sharing a couple of links on the topic of permanent knowledge. Here they are, in case you feel like exploring more: