rmonad: Restricted monad library

[ bsd3, control, library ] [ Propose Tags ]

A library for restricted monads based on associated datatypes. This allows datatypes such as Set to be made into monads. Users can either use the NoImplicitPrelude extension and use Control.RMonad directly, or use Control.RMonad.AsMonad with the embed and unEmbed combinators to use the normal Prelude monad operations. The 0.4 release mainly adds support for monad transformers. The dependency on the transformers package may be replaced by mtl if it seems likely that mtl will stay the standard for some time to come.

[Skip to Readme]
Versions [faq] 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.4.1, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8,,
Dependencies base, containers, transformers [details]
License BSD-3-Clause
Copyright (c) 2008 Ganesh Sittampalam, Peter Gavin
Maintainer Ganesh Sittampalam <ganesh@earth.li>
Category Control
Uploaded by GaneshSittampalam at 2009-03-18T22:32:45Z
Distributions NixOS:
Downloads 7767 total (5 in the last 30 days)
Rating (no votes yet) [estimated by Bayesian average]
Your Rating
  • λ
  • λ
  • λ
Status Hackage Matrix CI
Docs uploaded by user
Build status unknown [no reports yet]




Maintainer's Corner

For package maintainers and hackage trustees

Readme for rmonad-0.4.1

[back to package description]
rmonad provides a restricted monad class in the Control.RMonad hierarchy.
The class makes use of associated datatypes (available in GHC 6.8),
using an idea learnt from Wolfgang Jeltsch:

It also provides a way to treat a restricted monad as a normal monad
using a generic wrapper type. This idea is described here:

See the haddock documentation for information on how to use it.

darcs get http://code.haskell.org/rmonad


Add instances for all the mtl stuff. Consider also doing this for mtl-tf
(namespacing issues?)

Add all the normal monad combinators

Should we use Monad etc rather than RMonad etc for naming?
 - Pro: standard modern namespacing conventions
 - Anti: Module names need to be different to allow co-existence

Do we actually want RApplicative etc? Nasty because most restrictions aren't much use on function types
DSELs are a good example of where Suitable could be closed over function types