On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:15 PM, Mitar <[email protected]> wrote: > True. Approach with "operational" is really beautiful. And it is > really great when you want things done. But for me, Haskell novice who > wants to learn more, it hides too much. So it is probably something I > would use in my code, but on the other hand I would like an exercise > of doing things by hand. So first 100 monads by hand and then such > libraries are useful, but also you exactly understand what are they > doing - what are they automating, which process you have been doing by > hand before.
That's true, doing it yourself manually helps to see that there's no magic under the hood =). After implementing the monad, I would suggest trying to prove that the monad laws hold [1]. Sometimes you think you have a monad but you don't [2]. [1] http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Monad_Laws [2] http://blog.sigfpe.com/2006/11/why-isnt-listt-monad.html Cheers! -- Felipe. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
