Sebastien Carlier wrote:
> I'm constantly amazed by the number of tricks one has
> to know before he can write concise code using the
> do-notation [...]
In my experience it is not the do-notation itself, but the mixture
of monadic actions and higher-order functions. But after a while
you´ll really like it. :-)
> Another question concerning the do-notation: I noticed
> that most parts of ghc do not use it. Is it because
> the code was written before the notation was available,
> because the do-notation is too weak to express these
> parts, or for another fundamental reason ?
It's only because of historical reasons, nothing more.
Cheers,
Sven
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
