19 Jun
2010
19 Jun
'10
5:08 p.m.
I would expand your definition of "monadic" to: "able to syntactically transformed so as to be put in a sequence where an operation can be altered by the results of the operations preceeding it". IMO your definition matches more "applicative". 2010/6/18 Alexander Solla <ajs@2piix.com>
On Jun 17, 2010, at 9:44 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:
While we're on the topic, does anyone else get funny looks when they say
"monads"?
Yes, almost every time. They seem to catch on if I say "monadic" when I mean "able to syntactically transformed so as to be put in a sequence".
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe