Re: [Haskell-cafe] Monads, do and strictness

Oops, I was misreading. You have `e` here as the next monad. In any case, I think the monad identity concept messed up. The property: return x >>= f = f x Logically only has meaning when `=` applies to values in the domain. `undefined` is not a value in the domain. We can define monads - which meet monad laws - even in strict languages. On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:02 AM, David Barbour wrote:

On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 10:51 AM, David Menendez wrote:

...

The Eval monad has the property: return undefined >>= const e = e.

You can't write `const e` in the Eval monad.

From what I can tell, your proposed monads do not.

...

You can't write `const e` as my proposed monad, either.

Regards,

Dave