On 23 Dec 2011, at 16:16, MigMit wrote:
On 23 Dec 2011, at 02:11, Conor McBride wrote:
So... you are developing a programming language with all
calculations being automatically lifted to a monad? What if we
want to do calculations with monadic values themselves, like, for
example, store a few monadic calculations in a list (without
joining all there effects as the sequence function does)?
The plan is to make a clearer distinction between "being" and
"doing" by
splitting types clearly into an effect part and a value part, in a
sort
of a Levy-style call-by-push-value way. The notation
[<list of effects>]<value type>
is a computation type whose inhabitants might *do* some of the
effects in
order to produce a value which *is* of the given value type.
Oh, so it's not an arbitrary monad, but a single one. That's a bit
disappointing.
The list of effects is arbitrary, and localizable, by means of
defining handlers.
So it's not a single monad.
It's probably still disappointing.
Cheers
Conor
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
