[Haskell-cafe] Re: A free monad theorem?

[Bulat Ziganshin]

Hello Benjamin,

Friday, September 1, 2006, 3:13:14 AM, you wrote:

> The real question (the one that bugs me, anyway) is if one can give a
> precise meaning to the informal argument that if the definition of bind is
> to be non-trivial then its second argument must be applied to some
> non-trivial value at one point (but not, of course, in all cases, nor
> necessarily only once), and that this implies that the computation
> represented by the first argument must somehow be 'run' (in some
> environment) in order to produce such a value.

'running' in lazy language is subtle thing :)  there is mfix/mdo


-- 
Best regards,
 Bulat                            mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com