Proposal: Applicative => Monad: Is there any consensus?
voldermort at hotmail.com
Fri Feb 4 09:42:58 CET 2011
On 04/02/2011 09:50, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
> John Smith wrote:
>> On 03/02/2011 16:42, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
>>> (1) renaming fmap -> map
>>> (2) adding join to Monad
>>> (3) removing (>>) from Monad
>>> (4) moving fail to MonadFail (this is a language change)
>>> (5) adding Applicative as a superclass of Monad
>>> .. and maybe anything else I missed
>> This proposal (as in the patches attached to the ticket) is only (5).
>> The wiki page is much broader than this.
> The ticket is rather confusing, in that it says "The proposal is
> detailed in the wiki". I see the followup comment that the attached
> patches "only implement the new Applicative => Monad hierarchy, but do
> not change any names (as proposed on the wiki page)", but that doesn't
> indicate the status of the other things one way or the other.
> Also, the relevant attached patch seems to at least add join to Monad:
> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer:
Ticket descriptions are immutable, so I couldn't update it when the patch and wiki diverged. There is a section in the
Wiki page dedicated to describing the proposed patch.
More information about the Libraries