* Vo Minh Thu <not...@gmail.com> [2010-06-29 16:26:06+0200] > 2010/6/29 Roman Cheplyaka <r...@ro-che.info>: > > * Stephen Tetley <stephen.tet...@gmail.com> [2010-06-29 12:02:45+0100] > >> The "Applicative Programming with Effects Paper" has the "monodial > >> accumulating" applicative instance on a sum type Conor McBride and > >> Ross Paterson call Except: > >> > >> data Except err a = OK a | Failed err > >> > >> The names are nice and to the point, but they would equally describes > >> the other exception model (monadic - exit on first fail) and having > >> both might be particularly confusing to newcomers: two error types - > >> one with an obvious name, one with an unfamiliar one, the unfamiliar > >> one might be the one they need most often... > > > > On a slightly related note, in my projects I tend to define my own > > Error-like types with descriptive names, often more than one failure > > mode and apropriate instances. For an example of this approach, see > > http://github.com/feuerbach/loker/blob/master/testingtool.hs#L33 > > From a quick glance at it, I believe it would be easier to use > > Either MyError MyResult > > and then have > > data MyError = All | The | Possible | Descriptive | Errors
I would have to have separate constructor for satisfying Error class constraint, which I don't want to deal with later. -- Roman I. Cheplyaka :: http://ro-che.info/ "Don't let school get in the way of your education." - Mark Twain _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe