« first day (139 days earlier)      last day (1824 days later) » 

BMO
BMO
14:31
!!/type mapM
Lambda
Lambda
@BMO Monad m => (a1 -> m a2) -> [a1] -> m [a2]
@BMO (Monad m, Traversable t) => (a -> m b) -> t a -> m (t b)
BMO
BMO
@Potato44: \f xs -> sequence $ map f xs is the same as mapM and equivalently with sequence_ and mapM_. So you could just use interpret' = mapM_ step ;)
And do you really dislike syntactic sugar or is there another reason you use StateT $ \tape -> return ((), f tape) over modify f?
Apart from the Control.Monad.State implementation itself I don't think I've ever seen this notation being used.
 
5 hours later…
Potato44
Potato44
19:19
@BMO It felt funny, but I couldn't think of the name of the function that does that.
 
2 hours later…
BMO
BMO
21:17
Well, it's correct and probably the right way to think about state monads :)
But I imagine it would get quite tedious, I'll stay with modify, get and put (or lenses ;P)
Oh, I see you changed it.. It's much more readable now.
 
2 hours later…
Potato44
Potato44
23:34
@BMO I meant what I was doing before didn't feel right, I forgot about modify, and get & put...

« first day (139 days earlier)      last day (1824 days later) »