18 Feb
2002
18 Feb
'02
8:16 p.m.
Hal Daume III wrote:
I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Say I have something like that, then what's the difference between saying:
f = do { action1; action2; action3 }
and simply
f = do action3
?
If the result of each of the actions is ignored for the following ones, why do we need to do this monadically?
If g is an IORef, for example, action1 can modify the content of this IORef, but the reference itself is still the same. That's why I'd like to use the SAME g to all actions, although the content of g will be changed. -- Andre