[Haskell-cafe] Re: Let's do ListT right, finally

[apfelmus]

David Menendez wrote:
> Dan Piponi wrote:
>> Depending on your point of view, ListT isn't broken. It correctly
>> transforms commutative monads into monads. The problem is that you
>> can't express "commutative monad" any differently from "monad" in
>> Haskell. And so it's been shoehorned into the wrong type class.
> 
> If desired, we could easily define a class for commutative monads, and
> then state that ListT m is only a monad if m is a commutative monad.

While possible, it's not really worth it since the commutative ListT and 
the general ListT coincide when applied to commutative monads. In other 
words, the new ListT is strictly more general than the old one and thus 
preferred.

Regards,
apfelmus