seq as a class method

[Wolfgang Jeltsch]

Am Freitag, 24. März 2006 14:40 schrieb John Hughes:
> [...]

> Thirdly, the laws one loses are "nearly true" anyway, and that's very often
> enough. See "Fast and loose reasoning is morally correct", POPL 2006. We
> don't need to give up anything to make reasoning *as though* such laws held
> sound, in most cases.

I will probably have a look at this paper.  Nevertheless, I feel uncomfortable 
with the fact that something that isn't a monad claims to be a monad, etc.  
Maybe we should rename seq to unsafeSeq or something similar.

> John

Best wishes,
Wolfgang