Hans van Thiel wrote:
Just to show I'm paying attention, there's an arrow missing, right?
(.) :: (b -> c) -> (a -> b) -> (a -> c)
Correct. I noticed that after I sent it but I figured that it would be
noticed.
I also used (>>>) where I meant (>=>) at the bottom. They are
semantically the same, of course, but (>>>) requires the Kleisli newtype. :(
Many thanks, also to the others who've replied. I've wondered about
(=<<) usage for a long time too, and this is all very illuminating. I'll
work this through and put it in my monad tutorial, if I may (without
implicating you guys in any way, of course, unless you insist...)
You're welcome. I do not insist on anything either way. ;)
- Jake
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
