7 Dec
2009
7 Dec
'09
9:38 a.m.
On Sun, 6 Dec 2009, Antoine Latter wrote:
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Henning Thielemann
I hoped to get the first answer also for the second command. It seems that conversion from lazy to strict ST also removes laziness breaks.
It seems that I have to stick to unsafeInterleaveIO, but I like to know, why the above method does not work.
This isn't the answer you want, but there is an unsafeInterleaveST.
This was a typo, I actually meant unsafeInterleaveST. So, I'm still uncertain why the conversion to lazy ST and back does not work. I feel, that I have still not understood what "lazy" ST actually means.