# Talk:Functor-Applicative-Monad Proposal

### From HaskellWiki

(Difference between revisions)

(→Pure vs. return) |
(→Pure vs. return) |
||

Line 9: | Line 9: | ||

== Pure vs. return == | == Pure vs. return == | ||

− | When combining <hask>pure</hask> and <hask>return</hask>, perhaps we should | + | When combining <hask>pure</hask> and <hask>return</hask>, perhaps we should call it <hask>pure</hask>, or something else that is not <hask>return</hask>? It would defy convention, yes, but we would already be making changes that would require a Legacy module for backwards compatability, and it may reduce confusion over what the function actually does, because Haskell's <hask>return</hask> is nothing like "return" in other languages. |

## Revision as of 20:43, 1 January 2011

### 1 Fail

fail

Either String a

### 2 Pointed

Ifreturn

Pointed

Pointed

## 3 Pure vs. return

When combiningpure

return

pure

return

return