Home
Reading
Searching
Subscribe
Sponsors
Statistics
Posting
Contact
Spam
Lists
Links
About
Hosting
Filtering
Features Download
Marketing
Archives
FAQ
Blog
 
Gmane
From: Alexis Hazell <dry.green.tea <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Haskell & monads for newbies (was "Functional dependencies *not* part of the next Haskell standard?")
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cafe
Date: Saturday 14th July 2007 09:13:43 UTC (over 9 years ago)
On Saturday 14 July 2007 05:21, Andrew Coppin wrote:

> Still, while the concept is simple, it's hard to sum up in just a few
> words what a monad "is". (Especially given that Haskell has so many
> different ones - and they seem superficially to bear no resemblence to
> each other.)

Well, how about this as a starting point (from a post i wrote in my blog):

"[In Haskell,] a monad simply seems to be a computational environment in
which 
one can specify that certain types and methods of computation be performed,

and in which the three monad laws are expected to hold."

What do people think? With regards to the last phrase, i seem to recall
that 
there are monads which nevertheless actually /don't/ follow all three monad

laws?


Alexis.
 
CD: 3ms