On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 05:48:18PM -0700, Brandon Michael Moore wrote: > General purpose brackets are overkill here. I would really like a simple > monadic case. What's so bad about > > caseM mexpr of > p1 -> branch1 > p2 -> branch2 > > vvvv > > (mexpr >>= \e -> case e of > p1 -> branch1 > p2 -> branch2) > > It's simple sugar for working with monadic code, much like do notation. > (indeed, it seems to plug a gap - we have do for sequencing, liftM and > so on for application, but no sugar for case discrimination) > > It's a much simpler sort of thing than this fancy sugar for intermixing > code in various monads people have been talking about (so far it seems > assumed that one is just Identity...)
I think the CaseLambda proposal on the Haskell' wiki solves this one nicely. mexpr >>= case of p1 -> branch1 p2 -> branch2 You still have to use >>=, but you don't have to name the scrutinee (and names are expensive cognitively). Stefan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
