Re: New PAKCS release (Version 1.8.0)

From: Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias <>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 18:06:23 +0200

Hi Sebastian,

Sebastian Hanowski <> writes:

> looks like you're essentially aiming at a monadic semantics of
> non-determnism.
> The above equation could also be formulated like this
> [(x,x) | x <- coin] == uncurry zip (coin,coin)
> However, using the list monad to model non-determnism seems to have
> never been appreciated much by the FLP community because disjunction
> realized as concatenation is biased.

Right. Could you provide me more details about what do you think the
bias is?

Anyways, we don't need to use the list monad, we can use a lot of
different monads modeling non-determinism.

By the way, I'm not very confident that using monads is the way to,
but I want to play with them nevertheless, to see what kind of Curry
one get. I know of some papers who have attempted this, and certainly
the result was cool.

Thanks for your comments,


curry mailing list
Received on Mi Apr 11 2007 - 11:56:25 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Di Dez 05 2023 - 07:15:08 CET