Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Better runEff #25

Open
tomjaguarpaw opened this issue Nov 9, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Better runEff #25

tomjaguarpaw opened this issue Nov 9, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@tomjaguarpaw
Copy link
Owner

@simonpj suggested that runEff should be (forall es. IOE es -> Eff es r) -> IO r. I think he's right, because having an undetermined es in (forall e es. IOE e -> Eff (e :& es) r) -> IO r can only cause type inference problems, not help.

Let's add the suggested one, under a new name.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@tomjaguarpaw