> Rather than Haskell per se, personally I am most interested in
> the "category theory" approach summarized in Martin's email, therefore
> I prefer the alternative definition of monads as a domain satisfying
> Functor
>
>     map   :: (a -> b) -> M a -> M b
>
> with these two additional operations:
>
>    return :: a -> M a
>    join   :: M (M a) -> M a
>
> instead of "bind".

We can have both.  BTW, the 'join' operation is impossible to deal
with more than one type?

> Concerning your hack for FunctorPackage and MonadPackage you might be
> interested in another OpenAxiom innovation implementing the "forall"
> universal quantifier which often eliminates the need to write separate
> packages.

Yes!  One thing I felt lacking in FriCAS is the "forall" quantifier, aka
anonymous packages.  Another thing is category/domain constructor
as first class entity: in principle Maybe is a domain constructor with
type Domain->Domain, and a member of Monad, but FriCAS only
recognize "Maybe INT has Monad INT", not "Maybe has Monad" nor
"x : Monad" in package parameter.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to fricas-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to fricas-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to