apm :: Monad m =>是否有一个聪明的名字或更深的含义给这个combinator？ m（a - > m b） - > m a - > mb
apm fg = f>> =（= 感觉很像（<*>）的monadic形式，并且在使用带效果的lambda微积分时经常出现。
其中最近回答。
如果 app 是monadic，则其类型会被转译为
app':: Monad m => m（a - > m b，a） - >但是它也是monadic编程的一部分，它使用函数来引入更大的灵活性（的确，灵活性省略从箭头是为什么应用程序是需要的）。因此，这种类型的更好但较不直接的翻译将是：
appm :: Monad m => m（a - > m b） - > m a - > m b
这是您输入的类型。结论：这是一元相当于 app ，它允许您生成一个单项术语并使用它。它可以非常高兴地用一组最小的函数替换>> = 或 join 来定义monad。 / p>
Is there a clever name or deeper meaning to this combinator?
apm :: Monad m => m (a -> m b) -> m a -> m b
apm f g = f >>= (=<< g)
It feels much like the monadic form of (<*>) and comes up frequently when working with lambda calculus with effects.
解决方案 It's pretty much the monadic equivalent of Arrow's
app :: ArrowApply (~>) => (b ~> c, b) ~> c
which I was answering about recently.
If app were monadic, its type would be transliterated as
app' :: Monad m => m (a -> m b, a) -> m b
but it's also part of monadic programming to use functions to introduce greater flexibility (indeed, that flexibility omission from Arrow is why app is needed). Thus a better, but less literal translation of the type would be
appm :: Monad m => m (a -> m b) -> m a -> m b
which is the type you gave. Conclusion: this is the monadic equivalent of app, and it allows you to produce a monadic term and use it. It could quite happily replace >>= or join in a minimal set of functions to define a monad.
这篇关于更多“单一应用程序”？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
