Newest at the top
| 2025-10-20 10:59:21 +0200 | <dminuoso> | Except for some local computation tricks. |
| 2025-10-20 10:58:58 +0200 | <dminuoso> | davean: Apart from ReaderT, I've never really used transformers much for a bunch of reasons. |
| 2025-10-20 10:58:19 +0200 | <dminuoso> | tomsmeding: Perhaps. liftIO is just one of the few things that never really clicked on the naming to me. |
| 2025-10-20 10:58:11 +0200 | <davean> | It isn't how the effects compose though, which gets really improtant with state and such |
| 2025-10-20 10:57:26 +0200 | <dminuoso> | davean: Until now I was just focused more on thinking of transformers as a syntactical construct where IO resided in since thats how I think of how the effects compose. |
| 2025-10-20 10:57:19 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | and contrary to what davean is saying, I do not think your perspective is wrong, it's just a perspective that mismatches with what I think is the intended intuition behind "lift" |
| 2025-10-20 10:56:59 +0200 | <dminuoso> | davean: No, this is actually just a tangent I was starting to explore. |
| 2025-10-20 10:56:47 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | when you run them, you get a computation inside m, yes |
| 2025-10-20 10:56:46 +0200 | <davean> | dminuoso: which I think is where your confusion is |
| 2025-10-20 10:56:34 +0200 | <dminuoso> | Ah I guess not. |
| 2025-10-20 10:56:33 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | StateT s m a ~= s -> m (a, s) |
| 2025-10-20 10:56:23 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | https://hackage.haskell.org/package/transformers-0.6.1.0/docs/Control-Monad-Trans-State-Strict.htm… |
| 2025-10-20 10:56:16 +0200 | <davean> | dminuoso: no, no, that is very much NOT what they do |
| 2025-10-20 10:55:43 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | <monochrom> The best thing about meaningful names is that there are so many meanings to choose from! |
| 2025-10-20 10:55:40 +0200 | <dminuoso> | Dont all monad transformers put the base monad on the outside, in the sense that if we have some tranformer stack over IO, ultimately we have something like `IO ((M1 :.: M2 :.: ...) a)` (and possibly a lambda outside for Reader)? |
| 2025-10-20 10:55:33 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | 47 minutes ago |
| 2025-10-20 10:55:22 +0200 | <davean> | what did monochrom say? |
| 2025-10-20 10:54:17 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | it's exactly what monochrom said |
| 2025-10-20 10:54:04 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | indeed, SomeT IO may well have more logic than IO itself, so also in that sense, it's "lifting" into a more exalted space of SomeT IO computations |
| 2025-10-20 10:53:44 +0200 | <davean> | it maps the IO subspace into the SomeT space, and specicily the IO subspace of said |
| 2025-10-20 10:53:07 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | the sky above is larger than you, so lifting moves it into the larger thing |
| 2025-10-20 10:53:04 +0200 | <davean> | It can't leave IO |
| 2025-10-20 10:53:00 +0200 | <davean> | Yah, it NEVER LEAVES IO |
| 2025-10-20 10:52:51 +0200 | <tomsmeding> | dminuoso: I think of liftIO as lifting "into SomeT", not "out of IO" |
| 2025-10-20 10:52:48 +0200 | <davean> | Write, that projects from the IO space to the IO subspace of SomeT IO |
| 2025-10-20 10:52:01 +0200 | <dminuoso> | Well I meant `liftIO (putStrLn "foo")` of course. |
| 2025-10-20 10:51:41 +0200 | <davean> | No, putStrLn is already an object in IO, it has no other existance |
| 2025-10-20 10:51:23 +0200 | <dminuoso> | This may just be the difference between operational and semantic thinking. |
| 2025-10-20 10:50:05 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2025-10-20 10:49:26 +0200 | <dminuoso> | Rather than pulling it out. |
| 2025-10-20 10:49:18 +0200 | <dminuoso> | If we take a given IO action, say `putStrLn "Hello world"`, then its the action of putting that core inside layers and layers until we have a matching sphere. |
| 2025-10-20 10:49:07 +0200 | <davean> | It *is* the inner core, its not that we choose to think about it, it is litterly enclosed by |
| 2025-10-20 10:48:46 +0200 | <dminuoso> | davean: Sure, and in that model wouldnt we think of IO as the inner core? |
| 2025-10-20 10:48:27 +0200 | <davean> | expanding out from zero |
| 2025-10-20 10:48:20 +0200 | <davean> | dminuoso: don't think of it as a peramid, think of its a sphere with subspheres nested inside it |
| 2025-10-20 10:47:07 +0200 | wbrawner | (~wbrawner@static.56.224.132.142.clients.your-server.de) wbrawner |
| 2025-10-20 10:46:56 +0200 | wbrawner | (~wbrawner@static.56.224.132.142.clients.your-server.de) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2025-10-20 10:45:49 +0200 | Googulator64 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-03fa-0485-6a66-0733-0e38.pool6.digikabel.hu) |
| 2025-10-20 10:45:38 +0200 | Googulator64 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-03fa-0485-6a66-0733-0e38.pool6.digikabel.hu) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-10-20 10:45:37 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) merijn |
| 2025-10-20 10:43:05 +0200 | FirefoxDeHuk | (~FirefoxDe@109.108.69.106) |
| 2025-10-20 10:40:58 +0200 | <dminuoso> | davean: I guess if we just think of monad transformers or just constructions that eventually embed as some kinds of pyramid, it seems rather arbitrary whether we imagine the pyramid to have its tip pointed downwards or upwards. |
| 2025-10-20 10:39:44 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2025-10-20 10:39:09 +0200 | wbrawner | (~wbrawner@static.56.224.132.142.clients.your-server.de) wbrawner |
| 2025-10-20 10:37:37 +0200 | wbrawner | (~wbrawner@static.56.224.132.142.clients.your-server.de) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2025-10-20 10:34:55 +0200 | FirefoxDeHuk | (~FirefoxDe@109.108.69.106) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-10-20 10:34:08 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) merijn |
| 2025-10-20 10:32:26 +0200 | chromoblob | (~chromoblo@user/chromob1ot1c) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2025-10-20 10:31:59 +0200 | synchromesh | (~john@2406:5a00:2412:2c00:75ff:6dec:5332:48f7) synchromesh |
| 2025-10-20 10:30:40 +0200 | synchromesh | (~john@2406:5a00:2412:2c00:75ff:6dec:5332:48f7) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |