merge Reference and More into Other (Effect-TS#229)

pages/docs/_meta.json

@@ -30,20 +30,16 @@
   },
   "immutability": "Immutability",
   "dependency-injection": "What is Dependency Injection?",
-  "-Reference": {
-    "title": "Reference",
+  "-Other": {
+    "title": "Other",
     "type": "separator"
   },
+  "faq": "FAQ",
+  "glossary": "Glossary",
   "data-types": "Data types",
   "trait": "Traits",
   "behaviour": "Behaviours",
-  "packages": "Packages",
-  "-More": {
-    "title": "More",
-    "type": "separator"
-  },
-  "faq": "FAQ",
+  "packages": "API Reference",
   "coming-from-zio": "Coming From ZIO",
-  "glossary": "Glossary",
   "fp-ts": "Effect vs fp-ts"
 }

pages/docs/faq.mdx

@@ -2,6 +2,23 @@
 
 ## Effect
 
+### Comparison with fp-ts
+
+**Question**. What are the main differences between Effect and [fp-ts](https://github.com/gcanti/fp-ts)?
+
+**Answer**. The main differences between Effect and fp-ts are:
+
+- Effect offers more flexible and powerful dependency management.
+- Effect provides built-in services like `Clock`, `Random`, and `Tracer`, which fp-ts lacks.
+- Effect includes dedicated testing tools like `TestClock` and `TestRandom`, while fp-ts does not offer specific testing utilities.
+- Effect supports interruptions for canceling computations, whereas fp-ts does not have built-in interruption support.
+- Effect has built-in tools to handle defects and unexpected failures, while fp-ts lacks specific defect management features.
+- Effect leverages fiber-based concurrency for efficient and lightweight concurrent computations, which fp-ts does not provide.
+- Effect includes built-in support for customizable retrying of computations, while fp-ts does not have this feature.
+- Effect offers built-in logging, scheduling, caching, and more, which fp-ts does not provide.
+
+For a more detailed comparison, you can refer to the [Effect vs fp-ts](fp-ts) documentation.
+
 ### Extract the type parameters
 
 **Question**. Is it possible to extract the types from an Effect?