Hello Conal, Saturday, March 28, 2009, 11:54:55 PM, you wrote:
no, i don't use other monads at all > Do you have examples of usefulness your sugar for monads besides > the one? Since "do" sugar is notation for general monadic > programming, I wouldn't want to see it made more complex for the sake of just > one monad. > > - Conal > On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Bulat Ziganshin > <bulat.zigans...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello haskell-prime, > > as we know, the following code > > action x y >>= \v -> do > > can be shortened to following > > v <- action x y > > > > but there is one more very popular 'do' pattern, with a 'do' block > passed as a parameter: > > for list $ \element -> do > ... > > or > > bracket createDialog destroyDialog $ \dialog -> do > ... > > > what about adding one more 'do' sugar that will allow to move > variable name to the left, such as > > for element in list do > or > with dialog in bracket createDialog destroyDialog do > > or just > > element <-- for list do > dialog <-- bracket createDialog destroyDialog do > > ? > > > -- > Best regards, > Bulat mailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-prime mailing list > Haskell-prime@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime > > -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
