What does it mean for a monad to be strong?

Re:What does it mean for a monad to be strong? by bPspGiJT8Y on Monday August 21, 2023 @04:24PM (#37214869)

> How would you create a non-strong monad in Haskell, and why might you want to, or is it impossible?

I think the article implies it clear enough that it's impossible. Even if your monad has nonsensical (but lawful) semantics like `Proxy t` it's still possible to use it with `strength`. BTW the `strength` function is called `sequence`.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What does it mean for a monad to be strong? by kfixjviv on Monday August 21, 2023 @06:11PM (#37216037)

Haskell's sequence is not the same as strength. Strength specifically involves pairs.

Nobody seems to know where "strength" got its opaque name from. Like, nobody, not even the guy who first published the term.

There is another article on the topic here:

http://comonad.com/reader/2008/deriving-strength-from-lazine...

[ Parent | on HN ]