Difference between revisions of "Talk:Functor hierarchy proposal"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
[[User:Serhei|Serhei]] 15:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC) |
[[User:Serhei|Serhei]] 15:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | :You can't put defaults for one class in another. Though that could be another proposal. —[[User:Ashley Y|Ashley Y]] 21:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:02, 29 January 2006
Um, it would be good if it was something like:
class (Idiom f) => Monad f where fmap f m = m >>= return . f -- or ap . return ? ap mf mv = mf >>= \f -> mv >>= \v -> return $ f v (>>=) :: f a -> (a -> f b) -> f b
Or am I missing the point?
Serhei 15:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- You can't put defaults for one class in another. Though that could be another proposal. —Ashley Y 21:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)