6 Feb
2009
6 Feb
'09
5:46 a.m.
Gregg Reynolds
You've defined >>= in such a way that it carries additional semantic weight.
Would it be appropriate to sum up this discussion thusly: 1. What gets and gets not optimized away in a monad depends on the implementation of (>>=) 2. For IO, (>>=) is - must be - implemented in such a way that actions don't get optimized away. For instance as passing around RealWorld as state. 3. While the reason for this should be obvious, any formal specification for this requirement is missing. -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants