[Haskell-cafe] Re: don't: a 'do' for comonads?

[apfelmus at quantentunnel.de]

Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
> As seen on #haskell, from an idea by Malcolm,
> 
>     14:42  ?let top'n'tail = ("<pre>"++) . (++"</pre>") 
>     14:42  lambdabot> Defined.
>     14:43  dons> > L.top'n'tail "foo me now"
>     14:43  lambdabot>  "<pre>foo me now</pre>"
>     14:43  mauke> that reminds me, haskell needs don't
>     14:43  dons> yes!
>     14:44  pkhuong-> mm. the opposite of do, eh? do for comonads? :)
> 
> So now a prize to the person who comes up with the best use for the
> identifier:
> 
>     don't :: ?
> 
> -- Don

don't :: IO a -> a

example :: ()
example = don't (do erase "/dev/hda")


Regards,
apfelmus