On Feb 6, 2008 12:50 PM, Miguel Mitrofanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > class Monad m => MonadInv m where inv :: m a -> m () > > With this constraint you certainly can have your "inv".
Yes indeed. But I was kind of hoping that I could use standard Haskell classes without adding my own. (BTW I would like to know of other possible applications of 'inv' besides my parser. So yell if you find one please) Thanks, Bas _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
