2014 Applicative => Monad proposal

[Bas van Dijk]

+1 for AMP.

I hope it makes it this time.

On 23 May 2013 23:44, David Luposchainsky <dluposchainsky at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 2013-05-23 23:34, Stephen Tetley wrote:
>> Though I've previously expressed a preference for Monad/Applicative
>> changes being ratified as part of a language revision - I've changed
>> my mind in the last few days.
>
> I don't think you even need to change your preference here: the key idea
> of this proposal is that it is possible to be applied almost entirely
> without changing the standard. Once the Haskell landscape has complying
> code, the step from recommending to enforcing the AMP is a very small one.

One interesting question about the Haskell Report is if we should
generalize the following translation:

do {e;stmts}=e >> do {stmts}

to:

do {e;stmts}=e *> do {stmts}

Bas