[Haskell-cafe] IO vs MonadIO
Hi. Just a brief question. System.IO functions are defined in IO monad and have signatures like Foo - IO Bar. Would it be better to have all of them defined as (MonadIO m) = Foo - m Bar? What are the problems that would arise? Sergey ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] IO vs MonadIO
On 12 September 2012 18:24, Sergey Mironov ier...@gmail.com wrote: Hi. Just a brief question. System.IO functions are defined in IO monad and have signatures like Foo - IO Bar. Would it be better to have all of them defined as (MonadIO m) = Foo - m Bar? What are the problems that would arise? That would require MonadIO being defined in base, and might make some existing code fail due to lack of type signatures (though I suppose you could specify a default). -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com http://IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] IO vs MonadIO
On 12 September 2012 19:55, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote: On 12 September 2012 18:24, Sergey Mironov ier...@gmail.com wrote: Hi. Just a brief question. System.IO functions are defined in IO monad and have signatures like Foo - IO Bar. Would it be better to have all of them defined as (MonadIO m) = Foo - m Bar? What are the problems that would arise? That would require MonadIO being defined in base, and might make some existing code fail due to lack of type signatures (though I suppose you could specify a default). Oh, and you'd still need to define them all somewhere to work _for_ IO so you can then have the liftIO variants anyway. -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com http://IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com http://IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
