You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In 0.3, carrier composition is simpler, faster, and more convenient than in earlier versions. We should add at least one example of defining a carrier by composing other carriers together.
This is closely related to but (IMO) distinct from #9, which is about the simpler case of defining a carrier using a single underlying carrier; e.g. FreshC being defined using StateC.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@mitchellwrosen: Oh, thank you! Nothing off the top of my head; but e.g. I’ve written typechecking effects with a ReaderC for the context + WriterC to collect constraints. I think the example could just show off the mechanical parts of that, tho we should probably also (separately) document why you might abstract underlying effects behind some other effect.
I guess one classic example might be implementing State behaviour using the composition of ReaderC & WriterC.
In 0.3, carrier composition is simpler, faster, and more convenient than in earlier versions. We should add at least one example of defining a carrier by composing other carriers together.
This is closely related to but (IMO) distinct from #9, which is about the simpler case of defining a carrier using a single underlying carrier; e.g.
FreshC
being defined usingStateC
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: