In 1992 in the paper Imperative Functional Programming, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler write:

So monads are more powerful than continuations, but only because of the types! It is not clear whether this is only an artifact of the Hindley-Milner type system, or whether the types are revealing a difference of fundamental importance (our own intuition it's the latter -- but it's only an intuition.)

There seems to be a lack of evidence for the Hindley-Milner side of the question. (Perhaps there is an interesting paper in this as well).

My question is: Are the types that show monads are more powerful than continuations revealing something of fundamental importance? (ie are there some papers that have addressed this since 1992).



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.