On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Conal Elliott wrote:
> I call it "an m" or (more specifically) "an Int m" or "a list of Int". For
> instance, "a list" or "an Int list" or "a list of Int". - Conal
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Luke Palmer wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:39 AM,
Alexander Solla wrote:
On Jan 27, 2010, at 4:57 PM, Conor McBride wrote:
Yes, the separation is not clear in Haskell. (I consider this
unfortunate.) I was thinking of Paul Levy's call-by-push-value
calculus, where the distinction is clear, but perhaps not as fluid as
one might like.
What, e
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Conal Elliott wrote:
> I don't like this bias toward singling out Monad among all of the type
> classes, thereby perpetuating the misleading mystique surrounding Monad. If
> you're going to call [3,5,8] "a monadic value", then please give equal time
> to other typ
I don't like this bias toward singling out Monad among all of the type
classes, thereby perpetuating the misleading mystique surrounding Monad. If
you're going to call [3,5,8] "a monadic value", then please give equal time
to other type classes by also calling [3,5,8] "a functorial value"
("functo
I call it "an m" or (more specifically) "an Int m" or "a list of Int". For
instance, "a list" or "an Int list" or "a list of Int". - Conal
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Luke Palmer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Jochem Berndsen
> wrote:
> >> Now, here's the question: Is is cor
Quoth Daniel Fischer ,
> Am Donnerstag 28 Januar 2010 09:14:38 schrieb Ketil Malde:
>> Daniel Fischer writes:
>>> As usual, that only works part of the time. [1,4,15,3,7] is not a
>>> computation, it's a list of numbers. A plain and simple everyday
>>> value.
>>
>> But isn't a value of (IO String)
Am Donnerstag 28 Januar 2010 09:14:38 schrieb Ketil Malde:
> Daniel Fischer writes:
> >> It has been known to call such things 'computations',
>
> I think "actions" has been used, too, but perhaps mostly for things in
> IO and similar monads?
>
> >> as opposed to 'values', and even to separate the
Daniel Fischer writes:
>> It has been known to call such things 'computations',
I think "actions" has been used, too, but perhaps mostly for things in
IO and similar monads?
>> as opposed to 'values', and even to separate the categories of types
>> and expressions which deliver the two.
> As
On Jan 27, 2010, at 4:57 PM, Conor McBride wrote:
Yes, the separation is not clear in Haskell. (I consider this
unfortunate.) I was thinking of Paul Levy's call-by-push-value
calculus, where the distinction is clear, but perhaps not as fluid
as one might like.
What, exactly, is the suppos
On 27 Jan 2010, at 22:02, Daniel Fischer
wrote:
Am Mittwoch 27 Januar 2010 22:50:35 schrieb Conor McBride:
It has been known to call such things 'computations', as opposed to
'values', and even to separate the categories of types and
expressions
which deliver the two.
As usual, th
Am Mittwoch 27 Januar 2010 22:50:35 schrieb Conor McBride:
>
> It has been known to call such things 'computations', as opposed to
> 'values', and even to separate the categories of types and expressions
> which deliver the two.
As usual, that only works part of the time. [1,4,15,3,7] is not a
co
Hi
On 27 Jan 2010, at 20:14, Luke Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Jochem Berndsen
wrote:
Now, here's the question: Is is correct to say that [3, 5, 8] is a
monad?
In what sense would this be a monad? I don't quite get your question.
I think the question is this: if m is
Luke Palmer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Jochem Berndsen wrote:
>>> Now, here's the question: Is is correct to say that [3, 5, 8] is a
>>> monad?
>> In what sense would this be a monad? I don't quite get your question.
>
> I think the question is this: if m is a monad, then what do
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Jochem Berndsen wrote:
>> Now, here's the question: Is is correct to say that [3, 5, 8] is a
>> monad?
>
> In what sense would this be a monad? I don't quite get your question.
I think the question is this: if m is a monad, then what do you call
a thing of type
The list type constructor ([] :: * -> *) is a functor, and if you add the
implementations of join/return (or just return and bind) those together make
the monad. The value-level list [3,5,8] is just a list :)
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Andrew Coppin
wrote:
> Here's one for you to ponder.
>
Andrew Coppin wrote:
>> 7 is a number. 7 is an integer, and integers are numbers.
>
> 7 is not a field. 7 is an element of [at least one] field, but 7 itself
> is not a field.
>
> 7 is not a group.
Why not? It might be useful to use the notation '7' for the cyclic group
with 7 elements.
> 7 is
Here's one for you to ponder.
7 is a number. 7 is an integer, and integers are numbers.
7 is not a field. 7 is an element of [at least one] field, but 7 itself
is not a field.
7 is not a group. 7 is a member of the set of integers, but the set of
integers is not a group either. The set of in
17 matches
Mail list logo
