> Don't be silly. The purpose of some and many is to be used with combinators > that are expected to fail sometimes. If you use them with combinators that > always succeed, of course you're going to get an infinite loop. Would you > propose to ban recursive functions because they might not terminate? > > Apparently the confusion here lies with the fact that the documentation for > some and many are too terse for their behaviour to be easily understood. > That's a whole different category of problem than "ban them!".
Well, as I read it, the whole point of this thread was "They don't make sense for many instances of Alternative. They should be moved to a different class." It sounded like you were arguing that any instance of Alternative where they don't make sense shouldn't be an instance of Alternative, instead. Carl _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
