From reading the article he justified his motivation of learning category theory to help him learn how to express himself better. I feel he is looking for some knowledge he is missing from category theory.
I am not against learning category theory because you find it interesting, but one should be honest that it isn't going to benefit ones software engineering ability at least compared to studying good design directly.
>math seems to be a pretty safe bet in terms of ROI.
Ask most people how much math they have used of which they learned it university or high school. There are niches of math that are useful to niches. Study the wrong niche of math when you are in the wrong niche that doesn't use it, it will be a poor investment.
I feel that learning about concepts from category theory is... studying good design. I wouldn't know how to measure my software engineering ability anyway, but I do think I do write better software with that knowledge.
Understanding and learning to identify more and more monads was a big threshold for me. I never write "monad" in my code, because that's not I apply this knowledge. It's knowing how to write say, an interrupt handler, so that it will compose cleanly with 3 more interrupt handlers, or in such a way that I can easily simulate my embedded system with 5 lines of javascript.
I am not against learning category theory because you find it interesting, but one should be honest that it isn't going to benefit ones software engineering ability at least compared to studying good design directly.
>math seems to be a pretty safe bet in terms of ROI.
Ask most people how much math they have used of which they learned it university or high school. There are niches of math that are useful to niches. Study the wrong niche of math when you are in the wrong niche that doesn't use it, it will be a poor investment.