Move MonadIO to base

[Tyson Whitehead]

On April 16, 2010 01:46:43 wren ng thornton wrote:
> wren ng thornton wrote:
> > Anders Kaseorg wrote:
> >> class Monad m => MonadMorphIO m where
> >>     morphIO :: (forall b. (m a -> IO b) -> IO b) -> m a
> >
> > [...]
> > Putting these together, your class means: if you can construct/eliminate
> > an (F m a) in the IO category, then you can construct an (m a) in the
> > Hask category. I.e., IO(m a) is a subset of (m a).
>
> Which is more general than liftIO which only says (IO a) is a subset of
> (m a). That is, liftIO requires that the non-IO layers of m are
> constructed via `return`, whereas morphIO permits non-pointed use of IO.
> In other words, liftIO only allows lifting "effectful" values, whereas
> morphIO also allows lifting "structural" values.

Are you then saying that liftIO should be able to be defined via morphIO?  I 
would be curious to see that as, after a bit of trying, I still can't see how 
to.  Specifically, I can't capture the results of the desired IO operation.

If it is complementary to liftIO, and not strictly more powerful, maybe it 
should be named lowerIO because it's function seems to be that it gives the 
ability to lower (or push) a computation down onto the IO layer.

Cheers!  -Tyson
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20100423/797372f3/attachment-0001.bin