Proposal: instance MonadIO Q

[David Feuer]

Personally I'd think it sensible to push down Control.Monad.Trans.Class,
Control.Monad.Trans.Reader, and Control.Monad.Trans.State.Strict into base.
I don't know if any Writer or RWST variants are quite ready for that sort
of treatment, and ListT obviously isn't.
On Jul 23, 2015 3:55 PM, "Edward Kmett" <ekmett at gmail.com> wrote:

> Alternately we could lift MonadIO into base.
>
> This could be used eventually to lift more computations into MonadIO. Then
> nobody incurs an extra dependency and we have a first step towards more
> generic IO operations.
>
> -Edward
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Niklas Hambüchen <mail at nh2.me> wrote:
>
>> I'd also like to mention that there's a camp of people who'd like to
>> have a safe/pure version of TH that cannot do any IO - for changes like
>> the proposed one we should check whether they'd make that more difficult.
>>
>> On 23/07/15 20:09, David Feuer wrote:
>> > I'm very much in the "Damn the torpedoes; full speed ahead" camp most of
>> > the time, but not here. Transformers is a tiny step up from base. Why
>> > would you make it depend on template haskell rather than the other way
>> > around?
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libraries mailing list
>> Libraries at haskell.org
>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20150723/c94d966f/attachment-0001.html>