Hello Benjamin, Friday, September 1, 2006, 3:13:14 AM, you 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 value at one point (but not, of course, in all cases, nor > necessarily only once), and that this implies that the computation > represented by the first argument must somehow be 'run' (in some > environment) in order to produce such a value. 'running' in lazy language is subtle thing :) there is mfix/mdo -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe