Cont as Monoid
ashley at semantic.org
Sat Sep 15 02:37:29 EDT 2007
Conor McBride wrote:
> My usual rule of thumb is that inherent natural monoidal structure
> should have
> a higher priority than just applicative lifting of monoidal structure
> from the value type.
Monoid is a bit ridiculous as a class, as there are frequently several
useful monoids on a type, leading to a collection of ugly wrapper newtypes.
Monoid ought to be a type, in my view. And each of those wrapper classes
can be replaced by a value in that type.
More information about the Libraries