I can write precisely 2 implementations of that function. They probably don't have the semantics you want, however. ;)

-Edward


On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 12:56 PM, David Mazieres <dm-list-haskell-libraries@scs.stanford.edu> wrote:
Mario Pastorelli <pastorelli.mario@gmail.com> writes:

> Only the name 'mif' respects the rules with this type. The more generic
> version of 'ifM' is
>
> ifM :: Monad m => m Bool -> a -> a -> a
>
> and I don't think there is a name conversion for this kind of function
> in Control.Monad.

Well, if you could actually implement the above function, convention
would likely dictate that it be called "unsafeIf".

David
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries