On Feb 5, 2008 7:48 AM, Matthew Sackman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So I was thinking how dull and uninspiring the current definiton of > Monad really is and came up with some more interesting > parameterisations. The only problem with this one is I'm a) not sure if > it still is a Monad and b) very unsure if it's of any use. There's the > possibility that chucking Cont in there or using newtype to simultate > multiple arrows / type lambdas may lead to more interesting instances, > but can anyone think of exciting use cases for this stuff? > > Feel free to fill in the instances! It's also not a parameterisation > I've seen before.
I can't! That's because all the instances except for (->) have free type variables in a covariant position, so I'd be forced to used undefined all over the place. And the State instance just confuses me... :-) However, I think most Arrows would work as the first parameter, it's just not clear they would be useful. Luke _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe