Peter Verswyvelen wrote:
So you say uniqueness typing might be more general… Can one make list
monads and all the other funky Haskell monads with Clean’s uniqueness
typing then?
As my long post pointed out - as far IO is concerned, Clean is more
general than Haskell (less over-sequencing).
However in a general setting, monads are very general, much more so
than Clean's I/O uniqueness types. Monads capture a fundamental pattern
of sequential side-effecting computation in a pure referentially
transparent way - IO is just a specific instance of this.
Having said that, it's worth noting that list and maybe monads can
be introduced in Clean, but these would have nothing to do with the
I/O infrastructure in that language.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Butterfield Tel: +353-1-896-2517 Fax: +353-1-677-2204
Foundations and Methods Research Group Director.
Department of Computer Science, Room F.13, O'Reilly Institute,
Trinity College, University of Dublin, Ireland.
http://www.cs.tcd.ie/Andrew.Butterfield/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
