[Haskell-cafe] Re: [Haskell] Making 'Super Nario Bros' in Haskell

2008-10-29 Thread Achim Schneider
"Eli Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Is there a better way than IORefs > > > > > The state Monad. > > Do you mean one state shared among all actors, like this? > > type MGame = State GameState > newtype GameState = GameState { } > > That gets part of the way, but I'm thinkin

RE: [Haskell-cafe] RE: [Haskell] Making 'Super Nario Bros' in Haskell

2008-10-29 Thread Eli Ford
> > Is there a better way than IORefs > > > The state Monad. Do you mean one state shared among all actors, like this? type MGame = State GameState newtype GameState = GameState { } That gets part of the way, but I'm thinking of a situation where each instance of a particular ty

[Haskell-cafe] RE: [Haskell] Making 'Super Nario Bros' in Haskell

2008-10-29 Thread Achim Schneider
"Eli Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a better way than IORefs > Without looking at the code: The state Monad. Imperative implementations of games are usually[1] modelled as finite automata, there's no reason to do it any different in a functional language. Add a bit of glue to transla