Scribit Jonathan S. Shapiro dies 25/03/2008 hora 10:34: > 2. Every valid Haskell program *would* have a direct transcription > to BitC *if* BitC provided support for monads.
For the few that I know about monads, it seemed to me that they were only needed to have side-effects in purely functional language. As BitC is an impure one, like Scheme, aren't Haskell programs already trivially transformable to BitC? Purely functional code would be written with the side-effect-free parts of BitC, and could even be optionnally wrapped with functions that provide memoization or lazyness, and monads would be written in full BitC. Curiously, Pierre -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
