Cont as Monoid

[Ashley Yakeley]

Conor McBride wrote:

> My usual rule of thumb is that inherent natural monoidal structure 
> should have
> a higher priority than just applicative lifting of monoidal structure 
> from the value type.

Monoid is a bit ridiculous as a class, as there are frequently several 
useful monoids on a type, leading to a collection of ugly wrapper newtypes.

Monoid ought to be a type, in my view. And each of those wrapper classes 
can be replaced by a value in that type.

-- 
Ashley Yakeley
Seattle WA