Skip to content

GitLab

  • Projects
  • Groups
  • Snippets
  • Help
    • Loading...
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Sign in / Register
P
pakcs
  • Project overview
    • Project overview
    • Details
    • Activity
    • Releases
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
  • Issues 15
    • Issues 15
    • List
    • Boards
    • Labels
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge Requests 0
    • Merge Requests 0
  • CI / CD
    • CI / CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
  • Operations
    • Operations
    • Incidents
    • Environments
  • Packages & Registries
    • Packages & Registries
    • Package Registry
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • CI / CD
    • Repository
    • Value Stream
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Snippets
    • Snippets
  • Members
    • Members
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • curry
  • pakcs
  • Issues
  • #24

Closed
Open
Opened Feb 10, 2020 by Kai Prott@kaiprottDeveloper

Different implementation for PAKCS in Applicative IO - instance

In the version3 Prelude (*>) is defined as seqIO for PAKCS and as m >>= \_ -> k for KICS2. Is there any reason for this? Currently this leads to a warning when compiling with KICS2.

It would be nice to just keep the KICS2 Definition and let the PAKCS override the definition internally.

Assignee
Assign to
None
Milestone
None
Assign milestone
Time tracking
None
Due date
None
Reference: curry/pakcs#24