Re: pattern guards + monads

[Philip Wadler]

> Now, for monads, Phil Wadler writes a law:
> >       m >>= \x -> k x ++ h x  =  m >>= k ++ n >>= k
> 
> in which 'h' appears on the lhs but not the rhs, and 'n' on the rhs but
> not the lhs.  ... perhaps the equation should read as follows?
>         m >>= \x -> k x ++ h x  =  m >>= k ++ m >>= h

Yes, of course it should.  Thanks for the correction.  -- P