Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008, Neil Mitchell wrote:
I would like to know if in fact there's any difference in practice
between (), [()], i.e. if in practice the difference matters.
Usually, not so much. A lot of Monad functions have _ variants, i.e.
mapM and mapM_. If you don't need the result, use the mapM_ version,
as it will run faster and not space/stack leak in some circumstances.
In my opinion, mapM_ and sequence_ are in the wrong class, because they
do not need much of Monads, or even Functors. They could well live, say,
in Data.Monoid class. However, it's hard to integrate that in a
hierarchy of type classes.
instance Monoid a => Monoid (M a) where
mempty = return mempty
mappend = liftM2 mappend
where M is a monad type.
Surely you mean to say:
instance Monad m => Monoid (m ()) where
mempty = return ()
mappend = (>>)
?
That is the instance which is consistent with your text "don't need much
of monads". Then sequence_ becomes mconcat, and mapM_ becomes foldMap
(from Data.Foldable), or more directly mconcat $ map ...
See also Control.Applicative, for things which can be sequence_'ed or
even sequence'd without being Monads.
Jules
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
