On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 08:06 +0000, o...@okmij.org wrote:
> > It will
> > arbitrarily pick the first match in the former and fail to compile
> in
> > the latter case.
> Of course we can have duplicate layers. In that case, the dynamically
> closest
> handler wins -- which sounds about right (think of reset in delimited
> control).
Did anyone ever consider using type-level literals (strings) to 'name'
effects (or transformer layers when using monad stacks)?
A stupid example (OTOH) could be
updateStats :: (Member (State "min" Int) r, Member (State "max" Int)
r) => Int -> Eff r ()
updateStats i = do
min <- askMin
max <- askMax
when (i < min) $ putMin i
when (i > max) $ putMax i
where
askMin :: Member (State "min" Int) r => Eff r Int
askMin = ask
putMax :: Member (State "max" Int) r => Int -> Eff r ()
putMax = put
-- askMax, putMin accordingly
Using constraint synonyms/ConstraintKinds (e.g. type StateMax r = Member
(State "max" Int) r) might reduce some notation overhead.
Just a thought.
Nicolas
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
