At 2002-02-06 00:33, Koen Claessen wrote: >Hm... this looks nice. With slight name changes this >becomes:
Oh if you must. I decided that Refs were _so_ fundamental that anytime you get, set or modify anything it could probably be represented as a Ref, so the functions merit highly generic names. And 'read' and 'write' are for streams IMO. >Not really, the m -> r is still there in practise, since you >want to be able to use the 'readRef' and 'writeRef' >operators, which work on the monad m, and you want them to >work on the monad (t m). So how is that an m -> r dependency? Nothing is stopping the programmer have two different kinds of reference for the same monad, and 'readRef' and 'writeRef' will work on any Ref. -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell