Remove WrappedMonad

David Feuer david.feuer at
Thu Apr 26 06:46:04 UTC 2018

No, it doesn't hurt much right now. But if there Monad of no return
proposal goes through, I think it will become pretty much unusable. I
therefore think this proposal should be tied to that one.

Separately, the instances don't seem ideal. In particular, I would have
expected it to define

x <$ WrapMonad m = WrapMonad (m >> return x)
(*>) = (>>)

but instead it lets both those methods take their default definitions. It
also seems to be missing a MonadPlus instance.

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018, 2:28 AM Henning Thielemann <
lemming at> wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Apr 2018, David Feuer wrote:
> > Henning, how hard would it be to add some CPP to make those packages
> > work without WrappedMonad with base >= 4.8.0?
> I try to prevent CPP whereever possible. I would certainly add my own
> WrapMonad. But then, does WrapMonad in 'base' hurt?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Libraries mailing list