[Haskell-cafe] Re: evaluation semantics of bind
ketil at malde.org
Fri Feb 6 05:46:50 EST 2009
Gregg Reynolds <dev at mobileink.com> writes:
> You've defined >>= in such a way that it carries additional semantic
Would it be appropriate to sum up this discussion thusly:
1. What gets and gets not optimized away in a monad depends on the
implementation of (>>=)
2. For IO, (>>=) is - must be - implemented in such a way that actions
don't get optimized away. For instance as passing around
RealWorld as state.
3. While the reason for this should be obvious, any formal specification
for this requirement is missing.
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
More information about the Haskell-Cafe