This seems basically what I'm talking about, except even more hardcore. I think mostly what I'm suggesting is that the GHC arrow preprocessor to compile to something like generalized arrows, by default, with current Arrows as a special case.
-- ryan On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Felipe Almeida Lessa < felipe.le...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Ryan Ingram <ryani.s...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > The arrow syntax translation uses arr to do plumbing of variables. I > think > > a promising project would be to figure out exactly what plumbing is > needed, > > and add those functions to a sort of 'PrimitiveArrow' class. All of > these > > plumbing functions are trivially implemented in terms of 'arr', when it > > exists, but if it doesn't, it should be possible to use the arrow syntax > > regardless. > > There are already generalized arrows [1]. Is that what you are looking > for? > > Cheers, > > [1] http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~megacz/garrows/ > > -- > Felipe. >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
