Hello Mark,
Mark H Weaver writes:
> Mathieu Lirzin writes:
>
>> Here is a proposal for generalizing ‘and=>’ to a pipeline of procedures.
>> It acts like a “bind” operator in an ad-hoc “Maybe” monad which uses #f
>> to represent the absence of value. Not sure if it is useful in
>> practice, but
Hi Mathieu,
Mathieu Lirzin writes:
> Here is a proposal for generalizing ‘and=>’ to a pipeline of procedures.
> It acts like a “bind” operator in an ad-hoc “Maybe” monad which uses #f
> to represent the absence of value. Not sure if it is useful in
> practice, but it feels like a natural genera
Hello,
Here is a proposal for generalizing ‘and=>’ to a pipeline of procedures.
It acts like a “bind” operator in an ad-hoc “Maybe” monad which uses #f
to represent the absence of value. Not sure if it is useful in
practice, but it feels like a natural generalization.
The current definition is t
