<div dir="ltr">On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Andreas Abel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andreas.abel@ifi.lmu.de" target="_blank">andreas.abel@ifi.lmu.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Frankly, the proposal text does not make clear what exactly you want to do.<br>
<br>
I would guess the name 'fmap' was chosen for 'Functor' because 'map' was already taken for lists.</blockquote><div><br>About 15 years ago (in Haskell 1.4), 'map' was the name of the method of the Functor class. Then it was changed to 'fmap' and the monomorphic 'map' was added.<br>
<br>(Hint: go read the Haskell 1.4 report if you want to see a version of Haskell that is better than the one we have today in a dozen or so ways. :))<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
So it would make sense to<br>
<br>
1. remove Prelude.map<br>
2. make map an alias for fmap<br>
<br>
Then, in 50 years from now we can deprecate fmap and remove it in 100 years from now. ;-)<br></blockquote><div><br>I suspect that is the proposal, although it probably entails getting rid of Data.List.map (and re-exporting the Functor version) as well to not be a significant pain.<br>
<br>It is possible to break some things by doing this, but the corner cases involved ought to be pretty rare.<br><br>-- Dan<br></div></div></div></div>