Am Montag, den 17.01.2011, 19:24 -0500 schrieb Jan-Willem Maessen:
I think Tyson Whitehead unwittingly made my point rather well using the example of the CPS monad. I believe his simple explanation of join in CPS actually leads to an incorrect definition, whereas explaining >>= in CPS is about as straightforward as anything involving CPS can be (which is to say, more than a little convoluted).
If both (>>=) and join are class methods with default implementations that use the respective other method, you can still define the Cont monad instance in terms of (>>=), while you can use join where it is easier (e.g. in the [] instance). So instead of arguing whether join or (>>=) is easier, more natural or whatever, just let us make both a method of Monad. Best wishes, Wolfgang