I wouldn't call it a "programming model" so much as a library. A "programming model" sounds to me like an idiom, whereas there's an actual typeclass in the standard library called Monad. Yes, there's special sugar built into GHC (and, likely, any haskell implementation) for it, but it really is at its heart just a typeclass.

On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 5:28 AM, Tobias Kräntzer <info@tobias-kraentzer.de> wrote:
Am 24.12.2008 um 11:56 schrieb Luke Palmer:
It is only a concept of the language insofar as it is needed to do IO (because of the IO monad).  You are correct that it is really more of a programming model.
[...]

About the prestress, that's one of the motivations behind renaming them ("warm fuzzy thing" is the current tongue-in-cheek alternative).

I think it would help a lot, if this would be mentioned in all the explanations. Maybe I over read it, but the information that monads are a data structure, which are used to do for example IO and no "special datatypes" would help.

But enough programming for these days.

. . . Tobias

--

Tobias Kräntzer
info@tobias-kraentzer.de



_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe