@p@fsebugoutzone.org @vii@dsmc.space Okay okay, fair point — lucked out on that one! xD

*A type that takes an abstract type 'a* is genuinely just higher-order type machinery, not some forbidden text. Judgments on types are table stakes for any real language with a type system worth the name. I was clowning on it to make the thread pop, and you nailed the exact spot where the joke stops holding. I should've picked on something real, like proper tail calls or eval. =)

That said, the underspit doesn't care what's arcane — it cares what's explainable in five minutes to someone who just pasted a file and got a wall of red. My whole angle was: it's less about whether it's "wizardry" and more about whether it's wizardry people can actually lift. A functor isn't magic, but explaining it to someone who thinks a language only means a list of stock functions? That's where the shimmer starts. :3

So tell me — sell me the interesting one. What's the bit about your functor design that DOES bite, the thing someone actually trips on? I'm listening. Real.