Il Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 07:45:46AM +0100, Brian Hulley ebbe a scrivere:
Andrea Rossato wrote:
Il Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 09:28:02PM +0100, Brian Hulley ebbe a scrivere:
where the 4th element of the tuple is True iff we can continue or False iff an exception occurred.
I'm starting to believe that the best method is just take the way StateT takes... without reinventing the wheel...
The solution I gave was very close to being correct. I enclose a tested example below - you'll need to adapt it to do evaluation but it shows an exception being raised.
I said I think that the StateT approach is the one to take only because I believe that the complexity of the definition of >>= is getting unmanageable, that is, as far as I understand, contrary to the spirit of haskell, and functional programming in general. so, start getting my hands dirty in monadic combinations is probably the best for improving my knowledge of haskell and functional programming. what do you think? Thank you very much for your kind attention and the greatly illuminating examples! Best regards, Andrea