> That's interesting. > > I recently used parsec 3. I wrote using the monadic interface because > I could understand (just about) how to do so. I was looking at the > examples in RWH, and I could follow the explanation of the monadic > interface much easier. > Perhaps this was because RWH shows how to write using the monadic > interface, and then shows how to convert this to the applicative > interface. > It's hard to follow a tutorial that shows you how to convert from > something you aren't starting with.
>>I suspect that this is an interesting corner case of both my two >>reasons – firstly, Monads are too powerful here, and secondly, you >>perhaps found it easier to think about the operational aspects of the >>parser than to think about the denotation of what the parser should >>parse. >>Is that somewhere accurate? I don't know. -- Colin Adams Preston Lancashire _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
