Re: Adding an ignore function to Control.Monad

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:

David Menendez wrote:

...

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:

...

...

The main issue (IMO) is that do notation uses (>>) in the desugaring, which in turn means that it supports statements that just throw away not () results.

How is that a problem? The whole *point* of (>>) is that it discards unneeded return values.

I think we should avoid having syntax that implicitly does this. So

do getLine   return 3

should be banned, and users should be forced to write something like

do getLine >> ignore   return 3

or

do _ <- getLine   return 3

Ganesh

Again, why do you think that? I much prefer the current syntax. -- Dave Menendez http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/