On Mon 24 Jan, Michael Hobbs wrote:
> My original intent was to say that if you describe 'IO a' values simply
> as _unevaluated_ imperative actions and throw away notions of
> referential transparency and World states, then *poof* no more nasty
> philosophy debates. :-)
This agree with this, though I would use a word like 'unexecuted' rather
than 'unevaluated'. A critisism often made of the 'many worlds' interpretation
of quantum physics is that it's superfluous. You can't disprove it, but there's
nothing that can be explained with it that can't be explained just as well
without it. I feel this way about 'functions' operating on 'world values'.
Regards
--
Adrian Hey
