Like point free notation, I worry about what somebody somewhere is doing to it.... :)
The existence of a well understood community standard (add a type signature to your functions and only use monad operators with the laws) helps a lot - but both pieces are optional. I suppose the shorter and more declarative nature of Haskell functions makes it a less urgent point though.
On 4/16/07, Donald Bruce Stewart <dons@cse.unsw.edu.au> wrote:
clifford.beshers:
>
> Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
>
> david:
>
>
> Ah... so the secret is in the hidden variables. On some
> level I am beginning to fear that Monads resurrect some of
> the scariest aspects of method overriding from my OO
> programming days. Do you (all) ever find that the ever
> changing nature of >>= makes code hard to read?
>
>
> You always know which monad you're in though, since its in the type.
> And the scary monads aren't terribly common anyway.
>
>
> Also, the monad laws impose a level of sanity that most OO
> frameworks do not, right?
Ah yes, and we have the 3 laws of monads. If you break these , the monad
police will come and lock you up.
-- Don