On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:27 PM, Mark Snyder muddsny...@yahoo.com wrote:
So in this line of thought, where we have the operations and the control
operators, I guess my original question wasn't aware of the distinction, and
was looking for a name for all of them combined. In Haskell
Hi
(Redirecting to cafe, for general chat.)
On 12 Apr 2010, at 01:39, Mark Snyder wrote:
Hello,
I'm wondering what the correct terminology is for the extra
functions that we define with monads. For instance, State has get
and put, Reader has ask and local, etc. Is there a good name
Hi Conor
William Harrison calls them 'non-proper morphisms' in his various
papers modelling threads etc. using resumption monads.
Best wishes
Stephen
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
Hi Stephen
On 12 Apr 2010, at 13:00, Stephen Tetley wrote:
Hi Conor
William Harrison calls them 'non-proper morphisms' in his various
papers modelling threads etc. using resumption monads.
I like Bill's work on resumptions, but I'm not entirely convinced
by this phrase, which strikes me
Hi Conor
Chuan-kai Lin uses 'effect basis' in the ICFP paper on the Unimo
monads, otherwise I've seen 'operations' used. I'm on the fence for
'effect basis' vs. 'non-proper morphisms', but biased against
'operations' (as its not sufficiently characteristic).
Best wishes
Stephen
Sorry to interject a noob comment, and maybe I am not understanding
the question but why not just call MonadState etc. Monad subclasses?
get and put would then be Monad subclass functions.
-deech
On 4/12/10, Stephen Tetley stephen.tet...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Conor
Chuan-kai Lin uses 'effect
From: Conor McBride co...@strictlypositive.org
To: Mark Snyder muddsny...@yahoo.com; haskell Cafe haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Sent: Mon, April 12, 2010 5:34:05 AM
Subject: Re: [Haskell] Monads Terminology Question
Hi
(Redirecting to cafe, for general chat.)
On 12 Apr 2010, at 01:39, Mark Snyder
On 12 April 2010 20:43, aditya siram aditya.si...@gmail.com wrote:
[SNIP] ... why not just call MonadState etc. Monad subclasses?
get and put would then be Monad subclass functions.
Hi
At a pinch, that would tie them into their (Haskell) implementation
technique. Picking an example I'm
