At 11:02 AM +0200 1/10/07, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
Unfortunately, the current situation is that State is only available as a lazy monad, and StateT is only available as a strict monad.
[...]
The obvious solution would be to have available both a lazy and a strict version of each monad: State, State', StateT, and State'T (or some such), with functions to convert between them. It is trivial to implement that in the current library.
First, thanks for the very helpful reply explaining the situation. Second, how would one know that State is lazy and StateT is strict? I don't see that in the Haddock documentation. Third, isn't it a continuum rather than a binary choice between lazy and strict? In my example, I used ($!) in the definition of (>>=), but that's just one flavor of strictness that was appropriate to my example. Is there some way to parameterize this degree of strictness? Dean