On Sun, Sep 03, 2006 at 01:23:13AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tomasz Zielonka:
Programmers define the = method for their monads because they want to
use it to bind computations. They know how to pass result(s) from
one computation in their Monad to another, and they put this algorithm
Hello All,
many thanks for all the interesting answers. I think I have enough now to
think about for a while.
Cheers,
Ben
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Tomasz Zielonka:
Programmers define the = method for their monads because they want to
use it to bind computations. They know how to pass result(s) from
one computation in their Monad to another, and they put this algorithm
in the implementation of =. If they didn't care about passing results
Il Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 07:22:02AM +0200, Tomasz Zielonka ebbe a scrivere:
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 01:13:14AM +0200, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
So getting the value out of the monad is not a pure function (extract ::
Monad m = m a - a). I think I stated that, already, in my previous post.
Benjamin Franksen wrote:
Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
whatever you do, you won't be able to extract an 'a' typed
value, non-bottom from this computation. Cont is defined as:
newtype Cont r a = Cont {runCont :: (a - r) - r)}
So getting the value out of the monad is not a
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 07:22:02AM +0200, Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
The real question (the one that bugs me, anyway) is if one can give a
precise meaning to the informal argument that if the definition of bind is
to be non-trivial then its second argument must be applied to some
non-trivial
Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
Benjamin Franksen wrote:
I'd like to know if the following reasoning can be made more precise:
As we all know, the monadic bind operation has type:
bind :: Monad m = m a - (a - m b) - m b
My intuition says that in order to apply the second argument to some
Tomasz Zielonka wrote:
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 07:23:55PM +0200, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
I'd like to know if the following reasoning can be made more precise:
As we all know, the monadic bind operation has type:
bind :: Monad m = m a - (a - m b) - m b
My intuition says that in
So getting the value out of the monad is not a pure function (extract ::
Monad m = m a - a). I think I stated that, already, in my previous post.
I'd even say that the monadic values alone can be completely meaningless.
They often have a meaning only relative to some environment, thus are
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 01:13:14AM +0200, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
So getting the value out of the monad is not a pure function (extract ::
Monad m = m a - a). I think I stated that, already, in my previous post.
The only generic way of extracting values from a monadic value is
the bind
10 matches
Mail list logo
