plugins/nw/skills/nw-fp-principles/SKILL.md
Core functional programming thinking patterns and type system foundations, language-agnostic
npx skillsauth add nwave-ai/nwave nw-fp-principlesInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Core functional programming thinking patterns. Language-agnostic.
Cross-references: fp-domain-modeling | fp-hexagonal-architecture | fp-algebra-driven-design
[STARTER]
Three operations replace most loops:
| Operation | Purpose | Replaces | |-----------|---------|----------| | Map | Transform each element, preserve structure | Loop building new collection | | Filter | Keep elements matching condition | Loop with conditional | | Fold | Accumulate elements into single result | Loop with running total |
When to use Map: Transform every element without changing collection shape. Nested maps handle nested structures. When to use Filter: Select elements without changing their values. When to use Fold: Reduce collection to single value. Accumulator IS your state. Combining function IS your state transition. Folds make state machines explicit.
Decision: "Am I transforming, selecting, or accumulating?" Pick matching operation. If none fit, compose two.
Why: These operations communicate intent. Map says "same shape, different values." Fold says "many inputs, one output." Loops say nothing about intent until you read every line.
[STARTER]
Write the type signature before implementation. The type tells you what the function can and cannot do.
Process:
Design progression: Concrete types -> type variables -> constrained type variables. Each step increases reuse while documenting minimal assumptions.
Why: Function's type signature is a contract. Narrower types mean fewer possible implementations, fewer bugs.
[STARTER]
Decompose decisions by data shape, not boolean conditions. Each clause handles one concrete case. Compiler verifies exhaustiveness.
When to use pattern matching: "What shape is this data?" When to use guards/conditions: "What property does this value have?" When to use named bindings: Intermediate results need a name to avoid repetition.
Heuristic: Prefer small extracted functions over giant match expressions. Pattern match on top-level shape, delegate to named functions for sub-decisions.
Exhaustiveness as safety net: When you add a new variant to a choice type, compiler flags every match that doesn't handle it.
[INTERMEDIATE]
Fix some arguments of a general function to create specialized version. Eliminates throwaway helper functions.
When: General function exists and you need specialized version for specific context.
Chain functions where output of one feeds into next. Each function has single responsibility.
Why: Composition reveals architecture of computation. Pipelines read as sequence of steps, making business process visible.
Omit explicit argument when function is just a composition. Use when it reveals intent. Avoid when it obscures meaning.
[INTERMEDIATE] -> [ADVANCED]
Progressive hierarchy for working with values inside containers (nullables, lists, futures, results).
What: Apply function to values inside container without changing structure. Plain English: "I have a value in a box. Transform the value without opening the box." When: You have nullable/optional/list/future and want to transform contents without inspecting the container. Guarantees: Transforming with identity does nothing. Can fuse or split transformations freely.
What: Apply a function inside a container to values inside other containers. Plain English: "I have a function in a box AND values in boxes. Combine them." When: Validation -- check multiple fields independently, combine results only if all succeed. Doesn't short-circuit; collects all errors.
What: Combine two values of same type into one, with default element that changes nothing. Plain English: "I have many values. Smash them together into one." When: Folding/reducing collections. Combining operation must be associative, enabling parallelism. Examples: String concatenation with empty string | addition with zero | list append with empty list.
What: Chain operations where each step produces wrapped value, next step depends on previous result. Plain English: "Step 1's output determines what step 2 does. Each step might fail/branch/have effects." When: Sequential dependent operations where each step can fail, branch, or produce effects.
Do I need to transform values inside a container?
YES, one function, one container --> Transformable (Functor)
YES, combine multiple independent containers --> Combinable Containers (Applicative)
YES, chain dependent operations sequentially --> Chainable Operations (Monad)
Do I need to combine values of the same type?
YES --> Combinable Values (Monoid)
Each level adds a new kind of combination:
orders = [Order(100, "pending"), Order(250, "shipped"), Order(50, "pending")]
pendingTotals = orders
|> filter (o -> o.status == "pending") -- [Order(100, "pending"), Order(50, "pending")]
|> map (o -> o.amount) -- [100, 50]
|> fold 0 (acc, x -> acc + x) -- 150
[ADVANCED]
| Pattern | What It Manages | When to Use | |---------|----------------|-------------| | Optional (Maybe/Option) | Possible absence | Operations that can fail without explanation | | Result (Either) | Failure with context | Operations that fail with error details | | Environment (Reader) | Shared read-only config | Dependency injection, configuration threading | | Accumulator (Writer) | Side-channel output | Logging, auditing, collecting metadata | | Stateful (State) | Sequential state changes | Counters, parsers, accumulators |
These compose: real applications stack multiple patterns. See fp-hexagonal-architecture for DI patterns.
[INTERMEDIATE]
Separate WHAT to compute from WHEN it gets computed. Define potentially infinite sequences and let consumer determine how much to evaluate.
When: Generating candidates then selecting results | pagination and streaming | decoupling producers from consumers | build systems that only rebuild what changed.
Separation principle: Generate all possibilities, then filter. Declarative style says WHAT you want, not HOW to search.
[STARTER]
Mindset shift: Describe WHAT to compute (transformations, compositions, constraints) rather than HOW (loops, mutations, control flow).
| Imperative Thinking | Functional Thinking | |---------------------|---------------------| | Loop through items | Map/filter/fold over collections | | Mutate variables | Transform immutable values | | Check conditions with if/else | Pattern match on data shapes | | Inherit from base class | Satisfy capability constraints | | Call methods on objects | Compose functions into pipelines | | Handle errors with try/catch | Use Optional/Result for explicit failure in types | | Pass dependencies explicitly | Use Environment pattern for implicit config |
testing
Acceptance test creation methodology for the DISTILL wave. Domain knowledge for the acceptance designer agent: port-to-port principle, prior wave reading, wave-decision reconciliation, graceful degradation, and document back-propagation.
development
Cross-agent collaboration protocols, workflow handoff patterns, and commit message formats for TDD/Mikado/refactoring workflows
development
Creates a phased roadmap.json for a feature goal with acceptance criteria and TDD steps. Use when planning implementation steps before execution.
testing
Acceptance test creation methodology for the DISTILL wave. Domain knowledge for the acceptance designer agent: port-to-port principle, prior wave reading, wave-decision reconciliation, graceful degradation, and document back-propagation.