Gregory Propf wrote:
Thanks, that was helpful. I didn't realize that there were pure
functional monads.
Actually, it's stronger than that. All monads are pure functional, even
IO. Haskell is an entirely 100% pure functional language[*]. The IO
monad allows you to build up, in a pure,
class Monad m = MonadError e m | m - e where
throwError :: e - m a
catchError :: m a - (e - m a) - m a
..
power of TwoCont? I mean, it still seems like there's an operation
missing that supplies new left and right continuations at once.
i guess, instead of one DiMonad with two sets of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Gregory Propf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 1:40:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Parsers are monadic?
Gregory Propf wrote:
Thanks, that was helpful. I didn't realize that there were pure
functional monads.
Actually, it's
On Sunday 01 July 2007 09:34, Gregory Propf wrote:
Thanks, that was helpful. I didn't realize that there were pure functional
monads.
Neither did i; the general impression i'd got after almost a year of trying to
learn Haskell was: Monad Eisley Spaceport. You will never find a more
wretched
Thanks, that was helpful. I didn't realize that there were pure functional
monads.
--
Monadic just means a calculation using a mathematical structure
called a monad. All impure calculations in Haskell are monadic, but
not all monadic
