[Haskell-cafe] Re: Can we come out of a monad?

Lyndon Maydwell maydwell at gmail.com
Mon Aug 2 00:59:10 EDT 2010

That's true I suppose, although since there are no implicit parameters
in haskell, it really has to be a DSL in implementation, rather than
just theory right?

On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Ivan Miljenovic
<ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 August 2010 14:47, Lyndon Maydwell <maydwell at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I thought it was pure as, conceptually, readFile isn't 'run' rather it
>> constructs a pure function that accepts a unique world state as a
>> parameter. This might be totally unrealistic, but this is how I see IO
>> functions remaining pure. Is this a good mental model?
> That is what I believe Ertugrul is aiming at, but I believe that that
> is a "rule-lawyering" interpretation in trying to argue that all of
> Haskell is pure.  We could use this same argument to state that _all_
> programming languages are pure, as they too have implict "World" state
> variables that get passed around.
> --
> Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
> Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com
> IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list