Re: [Haskell-cafe] Better writing about Haskell through multi-metaphor learning

I didn’t thought on return function, on return as word, what you return from function.

On 19.09.2021., at 11:04, Joachim Durchholz wrote:

Am 18.09.21 um 14:11 schrieb Branimir Maksimovic:

...

I don“t see how does that anything to do with Monad ČP It“s just what you pass as return value.

Nitpick: "return" and "is" are one and the same in Haskell; there's no software-detectable difference between an expression and its result in safe Haskell.

...

Do { … ... } that’s just syntactic sugar, to look more nicely.

The do syntax is syntactic sugar alright.

However, it's not just the do block that's a monad, its top-level subexpressions must be monads as well.

Regards, Jo _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post. Once Monad always Monad, am I right? Monad is also way to keep state, and monad passes state between functions? IO Monad is just convenient way to describe side effects. I mean IO, when you see That you always think side effect.

Greetings, Branimir.