Matthias Felleisen wrote: >When a C programmer thinks about the >'return' type of a C function, he thinks about the value-return half >of a return statement's denotation. The other half, the modified store, >remains entirely implicit as far as types are concerned. Just because the type system of C keeps store implicit, it doesn't change the match between the meaning of 'return' in the two languages. The IO monad provides a refined way of typing imperative-style functions, including return statements. If you want to use a return statement in Haskell, you can, and it's called 'return'. (A reasonable alternative would be for 'return' to have second class status, as syntactic sugar for 'unit', analgous to otherwise=True). -- Scott Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.billygoat.org/pkturner _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Matthias Felleisen
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Joe Fasel
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Steinitz, Dominic J
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Jerzy Karczmarczuk
- Re: Just for your fun and horror C.Reinke
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Erik Meijer
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Matthias Felleisen
- Re: Just for your fun and horror jhf
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Matthias Felleisen
- Re: Just for your fun and horror jhf
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Scott Turner
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Matthias Felleisen
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Jon Fairbairn
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Hamilton Richards
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Joe Fasel
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Sebastien Carlier
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Ashley Yakeley
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
- RE: Just for your fun and horror Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
- Re: Just for your fun and horror Theodore Norvell