[Haskell-beginners] Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax?

[Sumit Sahrawat, Maths & Computing, IIT (BHU)]

Olumide, do blocks are indeed syntactic sugar. They are a piece of syntax
that converts to a specific type of expressions, namely those using the
bind (>>=) operator.

It is really helpful, when learning to be able to come up with answers in
your own. Learning Haskell has always involved combining many different
perspectives on the same topic, told differently in different places. It
would only help you if you took the time and dug further for answers. It's
really satisfying too!

Also, if you haven't, search for the Leavenworth guide. It takes this very
question in one of the miscellaneous discussions.

Be nice, be respectful. Have fun learning Haskell :)
On 22-Mar-2016 5:07 pm, "Olumide" <50295 at web.de> wrote:

> Quanyang,
>
> do bocks are *not* sugar, and please refer to Daniel's answer for an
> example of how to answer a beginner's question.
>
> - Olumide
>
> On 22/03/2016 11:06, Quanyang Liu wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 22 2016 at 18:52:41 +0800, Olumide wrote:
>>
>>> Hello List,
>>>
>>> Do IO actions *have* to be glued by the do syntax? Many, if not all,
>>> the examples that I've come across in LYH seem to suggest so. And if
>>> so, why?
>>>
>>> BTW, if possible I'd appreciate an explanation that does not resort to
>>> monads. I haven't studied them yet and I'm sure I'd struggle to
>>> understand any explanation that resorts to monads.
>>>
>>>
>> I think you should google that first... do blocks are just sugar...
>>
>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> - Olumide
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Beginners mailing list
> Beginners at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20160322/74e6fcb8/attachment.html>