On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 00:15 +0100, Chris Eidhof wrote:
I wonder whether it is a typical mistake of beginners to write 'return' within a do-block (that is, not at the end) and if it is possible to avoid this mistake by clever typing. In a proper monad 'return' can be fused with subsequent actions, and thus it is not necessary within a sequence of actions. However, although sensible, 'return' is also not required at the end of a block. Has someone already thought about a replacement for monads? I also made that mistake in the beginning, I used return instead of lets. I don't think it's a big problem, most users will find out once
On 26 nov 2007, at 19:48, Henning Thielemann wrote: they've got some more experience, and it doesn't really do any harm.
I may be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure he's talking about something different. Basically, where 'return' is confused for C's return. I have seen this occasionally in #haskell or on the mailinglist, but it doesn't seem to be a big issue. It doesn't come up all that often and it's usually quickly resolved.