Sorry, I thought you or someone was asking why are Applicative Functors faster in general than Monads.
Functional programming is structured function calling to achieve a result where the functions can be evaluated in an unspecified order; I thought Applicative Functors had the same unspecified evaluation order; whereas, Monads could carry some sequencing of computations which has the extra overhead of continuation passing. Do I have that correct? On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Ben <midfi...@gmail.com> wrote: > i'm not sure what your email is pointing at. if it is unclear, i > understand the difference between applicative and monadic. i suppose the > easy answer to why applicative can be faster than monadic is that you can > give a more specialized instance declaration. i was just wondering if > there was a way to make a monad recognize when it is being used > applicatively, but that is probably hard in general. > > b > > On Apr 20, 2012, at 2:54 PM, KC wrote: > > > Think of the differences (and similarities) of Applicative Functors and > Monads and the extra context that monads carry around. > > > > > > -- > > -- > > Regards, > > KC > > -- -- Regards, KC
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
