Yes, that's one way to define IO. But it's not the only way.
On 7/11/07, Jonathan Cast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wednesday 11 July 2007, Lennart Augustsson wrote: > Well, Haskell defines the IO type to be abstract, so if IO and ST happen to > be the same it's implementation dependent. And if IO uses a RealWorld type, that's implementation dependent too. But it's still useful to understand both RealWorld as used by IO and the same mechanism as used by ST. Jonathan Cast http://sourceforge.net/projects/fid-core http://sourceforge.net/projects/fid-emacs _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
