Jules Bean wrote:
do
a <- m
b <- n
l a x b y
becomes
l (<- m) x (<- n) y
...with, I suppose, left-to-right evaluation order. This looks 'almost
like substitution' which is the goal.
Having read the thread SPJ pointed to, I should point out that using a
mixture of Applicative and Monad notation, this can currently be written as:
l <$> m <*> (return x) <*> n =<< (return y)
...where the thing that feels weirdest is having to remember to use =<<
instead of <*> for the final 'application'.
Jules
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
