Because of AMP, I have to rewrite slides and example code
for my lectures, and I don't like it.

In fact I probably won't do it, and will advise students
to return to ghc-7.8 - but then, how does that look?


Really, my answer to

  [1] 3.5 Beginner friendliness
  How often did you say ... "A Monad is always an Applicative"

is: never. (for "is a Functor" - often. In fact, always)


Now, I don't want to bring on another general discussion of AMP -
instead I'd like to hear from people who use monads
in teaching (e.g., to define semantic domains)
about how they sell "Applicative m =>"  to their students.
(The intersection of AMPers and teachers is non-empty?)


- Johannes


[1] https://wiki.haskell.org/Functor-Applicative-Monad_Proposal

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe