On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Peter Verswyvelen wrote: > Okay. Now the following might not make sense at all, but... isn't the > abstract concept of a list just a sequence of elements (okay, with a > whole lot of extra properties)? So couldn't we write: do { 1;2;3;4 } > instead of [1,2,3,4] somehow for some special "list builder" monad? And > then do {1;2;3;4 } could be lifted to any kind of structure when you run > it through a different builder. Ah, I guess not... I'm not familiar > enough with monads.
Why not just FancySequence.fromList [1,2,3,4] or FancySequence.fromList $ 1:2:3:4:[] ? _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe