Oops, I don't seem to be paying attention to dates on posts.
--
Ashley Yakeley
___
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
Achim Schneider wrote:
> Conal Elliott wrote:
>
>> Exactly. and <*>, liftA, liftA2, ...
>>
> I think it's safe to say that there's a general consensus that Functor
> not being a superclass of Monad is a regrettable historical ward that
> ought to be fixed... the problem with fixing it is that it
Conal Elliott wrote:
> Exactly. and <*>, liftA, liftA2, ...
>
I think it's safe to say that there's a general consensus that Functor
not being a superclass of Monad is a regrettable historical ward that
ought to be fixed... the problem with fixing it is that it opens up a
whole can of worms, on
Exactly. and <*>, liftA, liftA2, ...
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Achim Schneider wrote:
> Conal Elliott wrote:
>
> > return
> >
> pure!
>
> There's the Other Prelude[1], which is enough fun to be taken seriously.
>
> [1] http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/The_Other_Prelude
>
>
___
Conal Elliott wrote:
> return
>
pure!
There's the Other Prelude[1], which is enough fun to be taken seriously.
[1] http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/The_Other_Prelude
--
(c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers
for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, h
Also, return, ap, liftM, liftM2, Already discussed?
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Thomas Davie wrote:
> Hi,
> Most of Control.Monad doesn't actually rely on Monads, but instead
> Applicatives. Data.Traversable fixes this in a lot of cases, but it would
> be nice to have the 'standard'
Hi,
Most of Control.Monad doesn't actually rely on Monads, but instead
Applicatives. Data.Traversable fixes this in a lot of cases, but it
would be nice to have the 'standard' functions as general as possible.
My quick reading of Control.Monad says these at least should fall
victim to d
