to clarify: having bind would be equivalent to having arr for the purposes of my question (assuming its the standard monadic bind).

having arr :: (b -> c) -> a b c

is tantamount to assuming that any haskell function can be embedded in an arrow instance

which prevents a lot of interesting deep embedding uses of the Arrow abstraction/ or at least makes it a bit tricker. (eg things like writing circuits or certain types of compiled FRP models).

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 4:06 AM, Jan Stolarek <jan.stolarek@p.lodz.pl> wrote:

> FYI it's #7828, not #7282.

Of course, yes.

> would making arrow remindable involve dropping the arr == haksell functions assumption or doing
> something that would allow generalized arrows?

Not sure if I fully understand what you mean. There's an idea to give up on current desugaring
that heavily uses arr, >>> etc. in favor of desugaring based on bind equivalents for arrows. Is
this what you wanted to know? There's some discussion on the Trac you might want to follow.

Janek
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs