# Javascript Functor, Applicative, Monads in pictures

Inspired by Swift Functors, Applicatives, and Monads in Pictures where the original article Functors, Applicatives, And Monads In Pictures is translated from Haskell into Swift, I would like to write a javascript version for it so that people not familiar with above languages can get the gist of essential functional programming concepts.

Some may feel this is a poor choice as it's against the common understanding that javascript is predominately imperative. However, according to our respectable javascript guru, Douglas Crockford in JavaScript:

The World’s Most Misunderstood Programming Language. “… This is misleading because JavaScript has more in common with functional languages like Lisp or Scheme than with C or Java. …” I believe javascript is equipped with most of functional programming features and fully capable of writing functional code.

Here’s a simple value:

And we know how to apply a function to this value:

Simple enough. Lets extend this by saying that any value can be in a context. For now you can think of a context as a “box” that you can put a value in:

Now when you apply a function to this value, you’ll get different results **depending on the containing box**. This is the idea that *Functors, Applicatives, Monads, Arrows* etc are all based on.

InHaskell, Maybe type encapsulates an optional value which is either a value of type a (Justa) or empty (Nothing). It serves as a container referring to the “box” mentioned above where we can put stuff in. In javascript, there is no such thing likeMaybe while we can easily see counterparts in other languages, such as OptionalinSwiftandJava 8, or Option in Scala.

To wrap the value, let’s use Array in javascript to represent a containing box.

### Functors

When a value is wrapped in a box, you can’t apply a normal function to it:

This is where **map **(**fmap** in *Haskell*) (<$> in *Haskell*) comes in. **map** is from the street, **map** is hip to containing box. **map** knows how to apply functions to values that are wrapped in a box. For example, suppose you want to apply a function that adds 3 to the wrapped 2 and assume there’s a **map** function exist:

### Just what is a Functor, really?

A functor is a type that defines how **map **(**fmap** in *Haskell*) works.

And **map** magically applies this function because *Array* is a Functor. **map** was initially defined in ECMAScript 5. Now it’s widely supported in most of modern browsers and javascript runtimes. Before that, this is how map is implemented in Underscore.js :

Regardless it iterates each values, here’s what is happening behind the scenes when we write **[2].map(plus3)**:

So then you’re like, alright map, please apply **plusThree** to a empty container.

It does end up with nothing. To illustrate it doesn’t apply a function at all, we tweak the function a bit:

Like Morpheus in the Matrix, **map** knows just what to do; you start with None, and you end up with None! **map** is zen.

In javascript, Promise should be also considered a container that encapsulates eventual result of an asynchronous operation. It uses **then **function to interact with the yielded value based on its states:

In this case, Promise is also a functor. It has an interface where we can apply a function to its wrapped value.

Here’s another example: what happens when you apply a function to a list?

When an Array has multiple values, it naturally apples the function to each value and replace the array with new values.

Okay, okay, one last example: what happens when you apply a function to another function?

Here’s a function:

Here’s a function applied to another function:

The result is just another function!

In javascript, we can achieve that by doing function composition:

### Applicatives

Applicatives take it to the next level. With an applicative, our values are wrapped in a container, just like Functors:

But our functions are wrapped in a container too!

Yeah. Let that sink in. Applicatives don’t kid around. Unlike Haskell, javascript doesn’t have a built-in way to deal with Applicative.

Says we have two wrapped values and we want to add them up:

What if we put a curried **add** function in **map **if the container is a functor ?

Now we have a wrapped curried function, how can we apply it to another wrapped value ? Assume **ap (**<*> in Haskell**)** is a function that can apply the function contents of a functor to an wrapped value.

If the we have multiple wrapped functions and values, we might expect this to happen:

Applicative pushes Functor aside. “Big boys can use functions with any number of arguments,” it says. “Armed with **curry function, map (**<$> in Haskell**) and ap (**<*> in Haskell**)**, I can take any function that expects any number of unwrapped values. Then I pass it all wrapped values, and I get a wrapped value out! AHAHAHAHAH!”

### Monads

How to learn about Monads:

- Get a PhD in computer science.
- Throw it away because you don’t need it for this section!

Monads add a new twist.

Functors apply a function to a wrapped value:

Applicatives apply a wrapped function to a wrapped value:

Monads apply a function that **returns a wrapped value to a wrapped value**.

Monads have a function **flatMap **(liftM in Haskell) (>>= in Haskell pronounced “bind”) to do this.

Suppose **half** is a function that only works on even numbers:

What if we feed it a wrapped value?

We need to use **flatMap**(>>= in Haskell) to shove our wrapped value into the function.

You can also chain these calls:

You might have the question that why don’t we just use **map**. I am glad you ask ! This is because **half** returns a wrapped value. If we use **map**, we are putting a container inside another container.

But why do we return a wrapped value in **half** ? In this case, we use the wrapped value to represent potential empty** **value and prevent the following calls in the chain from being executed if it’s empty. Let’s look at an other example:

Here’s a simple http request utility where we wrap the response in a promise:

With above utility, we try to make sequential calls to get the info of the first connection of contact 1.

The onFullfilled lambda can return either a value or a promise (thenable). When it returns a value, **then** is like a **map **function**. **When it returns another promise, **then** acts like a **flatMap. **The resolution state of returned promise will control the following operations and yield the eventual value (contact info of the first connection of contact 1.).

### Conclusion

So, we can see the following traits:

- A functor is a type that implements
**map**. - An applicative is a type that implements
**ap**. - A monad is a type that implements
**flatMap**. **Array**implements**map**, so it’s a functor.**Promise**implements**map**and**flatMap**through**then**, so it is a functor and a monad.

What is the difference between the three?

**functors**: you apply a function to a wrapped value.**applicatives**: you apply a wrapped function to a wrapped value.**monads**: you apply a function that returns a wrapped value, to a wrapped value.

So, dear friend (I think we are friends by this point), I think we both agree that monads are easy and a SMART IDEA(tm). Now that you’ve wet your whistle on this guide, why not pull a Mel Gibson and grab the whole bottle. Check out LYAH’s section on Monads. There’s a lot of things I’ve glossed over because Miran does a great job going in-depth with this stuff.

As a javascript programmer, you already more or less use functional programming in your daily work unconsciously !

Even though you might find it’s not too relevant as javascript is not strictly typed, I hope the article gives you a good introduction of functional programming and prepares you to learn other functional languages such as Scala.