G'day all.
Quoting Tomasz Zielonka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> OK. I think I may be getting it now. The point is that MonadCont takes
> care of passing the continuation, so you don't have to do it by hand. Is
> that right?
Precisely.
> Happy New Year,
And to you and yours.
Cheers,
Andrew Bromage
_
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 10:31:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> G'day all.
>
> Quoting Tomasz Zielonka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > BTW, the factorial example on
> > http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/MonadicContinuationPassingStyle
> > seems rather pointless to me, because it doesn't use any met
G'day all.
Quoting Tomasz Zielonka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> BTW, the factorial example on
> http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/MonadicContinuationPassingStyle
> seems rather pointless to me, because it doesn't use any methods
> of MonadCont (like callCC).
The only point of the factorial example is to
Kevin S. Millikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh, sure. I didn't mean to quibble with the idea that continuations
> are computational effects. Just wanted to point out that (I think) you
> can't macro express mutation with call/cc, unless you've already got
> mutation anyway.
That's right:
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:38:33 -0800 (PST)
Ben Rudiak-Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Scott wrote:
> > Why does Haskell have no continuations?
> > (http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/CoMonad)
> > If continuations are incompatible with non-strict semant
On Tuesday, December 30, 2003 3:10 PM, Ben Rudiak-Gould
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Interesting.
>
> This still violates referential transparency, though. (c 'get)
returns
> a value or errors out depending on whether (c 'set) has been called
yet.
Oh, sure. I didn't mean to quibble with th
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Kevin S. Millikin wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:39 PM, Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
> > With letrec and unrestricted call/cc you can implement ML-style refs:
>
> With an *implementation of letrec that uses mutation* and unrestricted
> call/cc, you can implement ML-styl
On Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:39 PM, Ben Rudiak-Gould
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> With letrec and unrestricted call/cc you can implement ML-style refs:
With an *implementation of letrec that uses mutation* and unrestricted
call/cc, you can implement ML-style ref cells:
Petite Chez Sch
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Scott wrote:
> Why does Haskell have no continuations?
> (http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/CoMonad)
> If continuations are incompatible with non-strict semantics, I'd
> appreciate an explanation.
With letrec and unrestricted call/cc you can implement ML-style
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 07:21:08AM -0600, Scott wrote:
> Why does Haskell have no continuations?
> (http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/CoMonad)
See http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/MonadCont
BTW, the factorial example on
http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/MonadicContinuationPassingStyle
seems
"cached" result from the previous call.
It's not an insurmountable problem, but it's pretty hairy.
-- Lennart
Scott wrote:
Why does Haskell have no continuations?
(http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/CoMonad)
If continuations are incompatible with non-str
Why does Haskell have no continuations?
(http://www.haskell.org/hawiki/CoMonad)
If continuations are incompatible with non-strict semantics, I'd
appreciate an explanation.
___
Haskell mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/ma
12 matches
Mail list logo