> 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
> 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
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 post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.