Re: Monad of no `return` Proposal (MRP): Moving `return` out of `Monad`

"Broken" here is hyperbole for "can be significantly improved for very little penalty." On 05/10/15 23:16, Brandon Allbery wrote:

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Alexander Berntsen mailto:alexander@plaimi.net> wrote:

On 05/10/15 11:59, Simon Thompson wrote: > There’s an old fashioned maxim that sums this up in a pithy way: > “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. But... it *is* broken.

Somehow, we managed to use Monad before this. That does not sound "broken".

-- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com mailto:allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net mailto:ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime