Re: How would you call it when a value turns into a monad?

> Tony,
>
> I thought you prefered unicorn? or was that fluffy?
>
> - Josh
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Tony Morris <tonymorris@...
> <mailto:tonymorris@...>> wrote:
>
>     Pointed/pure/unit
>
>     Christos KK Loverdos wrote:
>     > Hi all,
>     >
>     > We know that part of the definition of a monad is that nice little
>     > <return> function (in Haskell terminology) that embeds a value into
>     > the Monad. If you agree that <return> is not such a nice
>     description,
>     > what else can we name it?
>     >
>     > I am thinking of what the function does but I am not sure which of
>     > these phrases might be better:
>     >
>     > 1. lifts a value to a monad
>     > 2. wraps a value as a monad
>     > 3. injects a value into a monad
>     > 4. absorbs a value into a monad
>     > 5. embeds ... [which I used in the opening of this email and I
>     almost
>     > forgot to enumerate
>     > 6. turns ... [which is in the subject of the email and I almost
>     forgot
>     > to enumerate]
>     >
>     > .. and I could go on...
>     >
>     > As I see it there is no need for just one of them to be the
>     winner but
>     > is there any one that may capture the semantics better?
>     >
>     > Thoughts/Suggestions/Any Preference?
>     >
>
>     --
>     Tony Morris
>     http://tmorris.net/
>
>
>