var results = Try(()=>doSomething()).CatchI think that reads reasonably well and is a close approximation to a monad. The question in my mind at the moment is whether it will work as an extension to my already-created Exception Monad (MException if you're following me on Google Code) or whether I will need to create a new monad class, which would be annoying. In the latter case I would probably require an adapter, but that's okay because what do you think Bind() is supposed to be? LoL(()=>catchIt()). Catch (()=>YouveGotABiggerProblemNow()).Finally(()=>TidyUp());
Monday, 29 October 2012
Monads ... hang on, I'm thinking
So I'm thinking about monads and the shockingly non-functional try...catch...finally in C# and I what I want to do is something like this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment