Comments on: MaybeArrow? http://blog.downstairspeople.org/2009/01/04/maybearrow/ A blog of fleshlings and robots. Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:18:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Lane http://blog.downstairspeople.org/2009/01/04/maybearrow/#comment-18 Sun, 01 Feb 2009 14:02:21 +0000 http://blog.downstairspeople.org/?p=53#comment-18 Oh, that’s really annoying. I had to change a little bit of formatting with the new theme, and it got relisted on the planets.

]]> By: coeus http://blog.downstairspeople.org/2009/01/04/maybearrow/#comment-17 Tue, 20 Jan 2009 04:26:26 +0000 http://blog.downstairspeople.org/?p=53#comment-17 hm, k.
different getA/B/C, same monad.
as long as the example is short, this should work:

fmap (uncurry $ uncurry $ liftM3 foo) ((getA &&& getB) &&& getC) -< ()

i didn’t compile it, it’s 5:25 at night in germany.
goodn8.
- marc

]]> By: Lane http://blog.downstairspeople.org/2009/01/04/maybearrow/#comment-16 Tue, 20 Jan 2009 04:00:41 +0000 http://blog.downstairspeople.org/?p=53#comment-16 Heterogenous parameters, in other words, what I really want is something like:

proc _ ->
    do m_a <- getA -< ()
       m_b <- getB -< ()
       m_c <- getC -< ()
       returnA -<
           do a <- m_a
              b <- m_b
              c <- m_c
              return $ foo a b c

And for some reason, I didn’t think clearly about that when I did the original example.

]]>