[Haskell-cafe] I really don't understand this
lysxia at gmail.com
Wed Jan 24 17:52:24 UTC 2018
On 01/24/2018 12:02 PM, Jean-Marc Alliot wrote:
> First thanks again for the answer, I really appreciate.
You're welcome, I'm happy to help!
> module IOMonad = struct
> type 'a t = IO of 'a;;
> let return x = IO x;;
> let (>>=) (IO m) (f : ('a -> 'b t)) = (f m);;
> open IOMonad;;
The closest thing to Haskell's (IO a) in OCaml is (unit -> 'a).
module IOMonad = struct
type 'a t = unit -> 'a
let return x = fun () -> x
let (>>=) m f = fun () -> f (m ()) ()
I believe that definition will result in the same looping behavior as
with the original Haskell program.
It's not really a matter of laziness, but more of (im)purity. In OCaml,
functions can have side effects. In Haskell, we must write pure
functions that return an effectful computation as a value.
In particular, we have the following property in Haskell:
let a = print 1 in a >> a -- a :: IO ()
is equivalent to
print 1 >> print 1
because "a" stands for the computation that prints 1 and returns ().
Whereas in OCaml:
let a = print_int 1 in a; a
is not equivalent to
print_int 1; print_int 1
here "a" just stands for (), and the effect is performed before it is
But we can define (print : int -> IO.t ()) as (let print n () =
print_int n) in OCaml, with compositional properties similar to
More information about the Haskell-Cafe