Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: unsafeInterleaveIO respecting order of actions

On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:

On 2009 Jan 1, at 20:08, David Menendez wrote:

...

On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 7:39 PM, Achim Schneider wrote:

...

There are no lazy monads. Monads imply explicit sequencing...

Huh? How are you defining "lazy monad"?

We've had this discussion before; somewhere in the archives is an example of a State monad doing things in data-driven order instead of the apparently "explicit" monadic sequencing. Monads don't insure sequencing unless designed to do so (as, for example, IO).

Certainly. I asked because Achim might have been making a point about about call-by-need versus call-by-value, or something. -- Dave Menendez http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/