Why do you prefer "effect" to "side effect"? FWIW, I say "effect" rather than "side effect" when talking about Haskell, because in Haskell effects happen when you want them, not as an unforeseen side-effect as a result of the complexity inherent to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 12/12/15 14:38, Daniel Bergey wrote: the source code. It is often said that having an effect is "difficult" in Haskell. But really, it's just that if you are launching missiles in Haskell, *you actually mean to*. It didn't happen because you wanted to increment i and then "oops, stuff happened". - -- Alexander alexander@plaimi.net https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWb9WQAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BinMQAIzlf+zL00pjSfu/nkx8W59D IeGbGCWV8zG74963SmCJP70UzamysWs20my+XL7B8UnzbPY/1mKTDK56P/rI+Vbn +YUzWqNWDEuu8g37ATNrOyy99TyX+murkO10KnrYl9aVsOu4IK5in5dR95AKqouC f+NOD6LC29OWX+IfSzGajtmAlRra0yfn7C2x99TktL0+f+GpNHgdaY73SrYeqTaV rV8YF05pnAkHBI7wlXG3b5lwt9Zwhuiy7JLmaSZU1PrZM05/MQBXdiI7ShJafLvm GT8H6RgnnVmudRZYsVKK38mBU+GGiQ2J6VqUXBkCXbrxIB1Z0unNb6puw+nb6xNm 1jDM8DTzJZDD2H+sruZdI/R4wAcviVG79j/Kr6q5uraLkpylXo8w08w4MWKDeAL7 AX8Nv5OrdS9D9Ol9O6I1Tk3UGODQtkso5lo/M1LBT3KX6zCj7b1IZUw51sMLFmfY gOl4oFXG0Sn4+iVWNFE69li8Bx05EI7H/YK3B4hJyftsKsV3upMHIoruN1fHUVO4 kBhX5A676X1EIIWp2WDvix0Tl7F8KM05abD280+bGdDH3GRqKSaew5fpJmhZ7Qc3 Nxad8vMZoNPXaODf/jGIpZ1v4wcbKwwicjD4xZJeB8MQpCcAWkxTm3izoY2ZpzNm 6aO62BltRu2CNYcxYEhW =crfn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----