On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:18:40 -0700 "Hal Daume" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> so, my questions are: does this exist in some other form I'm not aware > of? is there something fundamentally broken about this (sorry for the > pun)? any other comments, suggestions? This looks like a bizarre rendition of the Error/Exception monad. I believe the function "breakable" would be fairly accurately represented with '\b -> runErrorT b >>= either return return' and use throwError for break. Also, your motivating example is ambiguous. I think you mainly care about the case where the test is testing for some "exceptional" condition. I personally wouldn't want to use this style every place I would use an if. _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell