Difference between revisions of "Talk:Functor hierarchy proposal"

From HaskellWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 11: Line 11:
   
 
: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)
 
: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)
  +
  +
::Wasn't this part of John Meacham's class system proposal? What happend to this? -- [[User:Wolfgang Jeltsch|Wolfgang Jeltsch]] 19:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:25, 2 February 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)
Wasn't this part of John Meacham's class system proposal? What happend to this? -- Wolfgang Jeltsch 19:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)