Heinrich Apfelmus wrote:
Alternatively, you can use algebraic data types instead of type classes
to generalize one program to different implementations. For monads, this
can be achieved with
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/MonadPrompt
In particular, the idea is to turn every effect like
getLine
into a constructor
GetLine
and have different implementations pattern match on that.
Ooo, that's interesting...
I did wonder for a moment whether this would allow you to analyse what
the monadic action does without actually "doing" it, but on reflection
this is fundamentally impossible. The action that happens next can (and
often does) depend on the result of a previous effect.
I guess if you wanted to run your action through an optimiser before
actually running it, you'd need to use arrows (and all the terrifying
syntax that entails)...
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
