[Haskell-cafe] do

[Peter Verswyvelen]

Yes, exactly, but how does one call the way of programming without 
monads / do notation then, explicitly passing the "object"? Does this 
approach have a name? Or just "non-monadic style"?


Henning Thielemann wrote:
>
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Peter Verswyvelen wrote:
>
>>> Actually I stopped bothering long ago about 'understanding monads'.
>>
>> I think that's a shame, because when I wrote the source code myself 
>> to get
>> from a pure functional approach (passing the "object" from function to
>> function as an extra argument) to a monadic approach,
>
> where "monadic" is still "pure functional", but somehow tries to hide 
> that
>
>