Konrad, Glad to know we were on the same page about monad transformers.
That transformer was indeed a translation from the Haskell implementation. Using 'with-monad' does clean it up. I'll have to take a look at your implementation of m-bind. I did prefer the conciseness and the fact that it would handle a vector of more than one value. But the behavior is identical, so it seems it's more a matter of taste. > > I also rewrote the maybe monad as: > ... > > Why did you do this? Did you just want a more concise implementation, > or is there a difference in behaviour? As far as I can see, your > version of m-bind does exactly the same as mine for all input values > that can occur in the given context. Yours would also do something > useful given a vector of more than one value, but that should never > happen in the maybe monad. I've got some more thinking to do about transformers, when I get a chance. Jim --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
