> > According to the monad law
> >
> > f >>= return = f
> >
[... snip ...]
>
> So, "(undefined >> return 2) = (return 2)"
>
*scratching head* I don't see how that's a counterexample of the monad law.
Instantiating the law for undefined would IMO yield something like:
(undefined >>= return) = \r -> return (undefined r) r
= \r -> undefined r
= undefined
(considering "undefined" as equivalent to "const undefined", which iirc was
the definition of _|_ for function types).
What am I missing?
--
Ariel J. Birnbaum
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
