Cont as Monoid
benjamin.franksen at bessy.de
Tue Sep 18 13:35:12 EDT 2007
Ashley Yakeley wrote:
> 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
> Monoid ought to be a type, in my view. And each of those wrapper classes
> can be replaced by a value in that type.
Would you care to elaborate this idea? Do you mean a record with two
More information about the Libraries