[Haskell-beginners] Type classes and synonyms
ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org
Sun Nov 22 12:14:30 EST 2009
Stephen Tetley wrote:
> 2009/11/22 Isaac Dupree <ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org>:
>> Sorry to take offense :-) maybe I was being too modest?
>> It seems Arrows are a necessary abstraction for a couple very particular
>> world-views/paradigms, and don't fit very well with a lot of other stuff.
> Hello All
> I wouldn't go quite as far as saying Arrows are misfits, but in
> Isaac's defence, if all you have are pure functions, then arrows are
> just a wee bit, erm, boring.
there are a few combinators in Arrow that would be nice to have for
functions, without even that Arrow generalization, as people have noted
now and then. I used to use them sometimes, but then I decided that it
was a bit too confusing to the reader to involve a type-class (Arrow)
that wasn't very relevant (and not ubiquitously well-known), even if a
version with explicit lambdas is a bit longer.
More information about the Beginners