This article seems a bit heavy on the computational monads.
Monads don't necessarily have anything to do with sequencing or computation, and the author is objectively incorrect to say "monads are a pattern, not a specific type". In fact, monads are an algebraic structure, defined only by the types of the operations defined on them and the laws those operations obey.
That's not to say that concrete examples like the one here aren't useful, but the author is not covering the full scope of what monads are.
Monads don't necessarily have anything to do with sequencing or computation, and the author is objectively incorrect to say "monads are a pattern, not a specific type". In fact, monads are an algebraic structure, defined only by the types of the operations defined on them and the laws those operations obey.
That's not to say that concrete examples like the one here aren't useful, but the author is not covering the full scope of what monads are.