I see the problem now. But I am confused as to why there are no Bool class (like Num, Fractional...) in Haskell. If I had such a class then the problem is solved, (by making the "pm a" an instance of it) right? Or are there still more issues that I am not seeing?
thanks, daryoush On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Chung-chieh Shan <ccs...@cs.rutgers.edu>wrote: > Daryoush Mehrtash <dmehrt...@gmail.com> wrote in haskell-cafe: > > I am confused about this comment: > > > Mostly we preferred (as do the domain experts we target) to write > > > probabilistic models in direct style rather than monadic > > > > In the haskell implementation of the lawn model there are two different > > version of the grassModel ( > > https://github.com/rst76/probability/blob/master/src/Lawn.hs)... > > By domain expert preferring direct style do you mean that they prefer > > the first version over the 2nd version? > > No, there is no way to write probabilistic models in direct style in > Haskell, and domain experts prefer neither Haskell version you showed. > > A symptom of direct style is being able to write something like > > flip 0.3 && flip 0.5 > > where (&&) takes two Bool arguments. > > -- > Edit this signature at http://www.digitas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/ken/sig > 1st graffitiist: QUESTION AUTHORITY! > 2nd graffitiist: Why? > > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > -- Daryoush Weblog: http://onfp.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
