On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 04:59:45PM +, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Well, that???s a possible implementation of a maybeToM. The question is:
> Is it useful enough for a name on it???s own?
OK, I agree it's sufficiently useful, and it's a generalization of
Data.Maybe.maybeToList. Perhaps we could g
On 18 dec 2006, at 18.22, Stefan O'Rear wrote:
I can't see how such a generalization could look like, especially
since
"maybe" can be used with arbitrary monad:
maybe (fail "Nothing") return
Well, that???s a possible implementation of a maybeToM. The
question is:
Is it useful enough f
Hi,
Am Montag, den 18.12.2006, 09:22 -0800 schrieb Stefan O'Rear:
> module Data.Generics.Serialization.Standard ...
>
> -- |Convert a 'Maybe' object into any monad, using the imbedding defined by
> -- fail and return.
> fromMaybeM :: Monad m => String -> Maybe a -> m a
> fromMaybeM st = maybe (fa
Hi,
Am Montag, den 18.12.2006, 18:12 +0100 schrieb Tomasz Zielonka:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 04:59:45PM +, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > Well, that???s a possible implementation of a maybeToM. The question is:
> > Is it useful enough for a name on it???s own?
>
> ...and for putting it in Prelu
> > I can't see how such a generalization could look like, especially since
> > "maybe" can be used with arbitrary monad:
> > maybe (fail "Nothing") return
>
> Well, that???s a possible implementation of a maybeToM. The question is:
> Is it useful enough for a name on it???s own?
I thought it
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 04:59:45PM +, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Well, that???s a possible implementation of a maybeToM. The question is:
> Is it useful enough for a name on it???s own?
...and for putting it in Prelude?
It would be interesting to try to estimate the number of functions
useful
Hi,
Am Montag, den 18.12.2006, 17:42 +0100 schrieb Tomasz Zielonka:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 09:29:24AM +, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > dons mentions in his blog post that Data.Map???s lookup is generalized
> > over the Monads, whereas Prelude.maybe isn???t. Are there good reasons not
> > to d
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 09:29:24AM +, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> dons mentions in his blog post that Data.Map???s lookup is generalized
> over the Monads, whereas Prelude.maybe isn???t. Are there good reasons not
> to do that to Prelude.maybe as well?
I can't see how such a generalization could
Hi,
dons mentions in his blog post that Data.Map’s lookup is generalized
over the Monads, whereas Prelude.maybe isn’t. Are there good reasons not
to do that to Prelude.maybe as well?
Alternatively, how about adding this function to Data.Maybe, analogous
to maybeToList
> maybeToM Nothing = fail
