Proposal: Adding Kleisli composition to Control.Monad
taralx at gmail.com
Mon Nov 13 10:05:48 EST 2006
On 11/13/06, Taral <taralx at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/13/06, Donald Bruce Stewart <dons at cse.unsw.edu.au> wrote:
> > > (>=>) :: (Monad m) => (a -> m b) -> (b -> m c) -> (a -> m c)
> > > (<=<) :: (Monad m) => (b -> m c) -> (a -> m b) -> (a -> m c)
> > Does anyone have an opinion about these guys? :)
> I want them. See my timeout patch for a case where I wanted one of
> these and didn't have it (the catch filter expression).
Actually, my tests indicate that (>>>) and (<<<) can be used for any
Monad. So are we defining these again?
Taral <taralx at gmail.com>
"You can't prove anything."
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
More information about the Libraries