Applicative and parsec3

[Antoine Latter]

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Edward Kmett <ekmett at gmail.com> wrote:
> While you're hacking around on parsec a nice improvement would be to relax
> the type on the language generators in
> Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Language. (This one could be done without so
> drastic a change as bumping from 3 to 4):
> They can all be instantiated for Monad m => GenLanguageDef String s m
> instead of LanguageDef, this would greatly extend their usability.
> You could even go a little farther and relax them so they can work over
> Bytestrings, etc.
> I for one always feel a little twinge when I'm forced to copy and paste them
> and change the signature just because I'm working in a parser that provides
> state, uses _any_ base monad, or consumes some other Char source.
> -Edward Kmett

I'd be happy to apply a patch for this.

>
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Christian Maeder <Christian.Maeder at dfki.de>
> wrote:
>>
>> Am 27.01.2011 07:16, schrieb Kazu Yamamoto (山本和彦):
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I'm using parsec3 with the applicative style. Since the functions in
>> > Control.Applicative and parsec3 conflicts, I need to use the "hiding"
>> > keyword as follows:
>> >
>> >       import Control.Applicative hiding (many,optional,(<|>))
>> >       import Text.Parsec
>> >
>> > This is inconvenient for me. I would like to use them as follows:
>> >
>> >       import Control.Applicative
>> >       import Text.Parsec
>> >
>> > Christian, the maintainer of parsec3, told me that it is possible to
>> > use the functions of Control.Applicative in parsec3 instead of
>> > implementing its own functions. But (<|>) of parsec3 is "infixr 1"
>> > while that of Control.Applicative is "infixl 3".  This may be an
>> > issue.
>> >
>> > Any ideas to solve this issue?
>>
>> If parsec is not changed I could create a parsec4 package where the
>> conflicting functions are removed from Text.Parsec.
>>
>> This will break code that uses "optional" from Text.Parsec. Is there a
>> need for a renaming of Text.Parsec.Combinator.optional, like
>> "voidOptional"?
>>
>> Such a function would be better placed inside Control.Applicative though:
>>
>>  voidOptional v = const () <$> v <|> pure ()
>>
>> or
>>
>>  voidOptional = void . optional
>>
>>
>> using the new Control.Monad.void.
>>
>> C.
>>
>> >
>> > --Kazu
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libraries mailing list
>> Libraries at haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>
>