And it looks slightly clearer when laid out correctly
thenP :: P a -> (a -> P b) -> P b
m `thenP` k = \s ->
case m s of
Ok a -> k a s
Failed e -> Failed e
But this is not a fair test. There needs to be a control. Implement the same functionality in Python and then we'll talk about which language is clearer.
I copy-pasted directly from the doc page that layout, guess I should've proofread it to make sure alignment was right. Thanks!
As to the comment re: control / python, I'm sorry but it's so obvious to me the syntax would be more legible to most developers (since "most" use Algol descendent syntax languages) even if done somewhat poorly, I don't feel like taking the time. I welcome you to prove me wrong, I'll gladly stand corrected if so!
