Hal Daume III wrote: > I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Say I have something like that, then > what's the difference between saying: > > f = do { action1; > action2; > action3 } > > and simply > > f = do action3 > > ? > > If the result of each of the actions is ignored for the following ones, > why do we need to do this monadically?
If g is an IORef, for example, action1 can modify the content of this IORef, but the reference itself is still the same. That's why I'd like to use the SAME g to all actions, although the content of g will be changed. -- Andre _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell