On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 3:16 AM, Tobias Kräntzer <i...@tobias-kraentzer.de>wrote:
> Hi, > > I think I now understand all the stuff about monades (not the mathematics). > I have just one further question. > > Beside of the syntactic sugar of the "do" construct and the fact that the > IO monade is an "internal type of haskell": Is haskell aware of the concept > of monades? As I now understand it, it is "just" a programming model rather > than a concept of the language. If not, I have to start new. It is only a concept of the language insofar as it is needed to do IO (because of the IO monad). You are correct that it is really more of a programming model. Indeed, Haskell would be just fine if you took out IO, the class declaration of Monad, and its instances. And I have used monads in C# (but there is a bit less assurance since lambdas can have side effects). About the prestress, that's one of the motivations behind renaming them ("warm fuzzy thing" is the current tongue-in-cheek alternative). Luke
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe