One more 'do' pattern

[Bulat Ziganshin]

Hello Conal,

Saturday, March 28, 2009, 11:54:55 PM, you wrote:

no, i don't use other monads at all

> Do you have examples of usefulness your sugar for monads besides
> the one?  Since "do" sugar is notation for general monadic
> programming, I wouldn't want to see it made more complex for the sake of just one monad.
>  
>   - Conal

> On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Bulat Ziganshin
> <bulat.ziganshin at gmail.com> wrote:
>  Hello haskell-prime,
>  
>  as we know, the following code
>  
>  action x y >>= \v -> do
>  
>  can be shortened to following
>  
>  v <- action x y
>  
>  
>  
>  but there is one more very popular 'do' pattern, with a 'do' block
>  passed as a parameter:
>  
>  for list $ \element -> do
>   ...
>  
>  or
>  
>  bracket createDialog destroyDialog $ \dialog -> do
>  ...
>  
>  
>  what about adding one more 'do' sugar that will allow to move
>  variable name to the left, such as
>  
>  for element in list do
>  or
>  with dialog in bracket createDialog destroyDialog do
>  
>  or just
>  
>  element <-- for list do
>  dialog <-- bracket createDialog destroyDialog do
>  
>  ?
>  
>  
>  --
>  Best regards,
>   Bulat                          mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  Haskell-prime mailing list
>  Haskell-prime at haskell.org
>  http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
>  

>   


-- 
Best regards,
 Bulat                            mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com