[Haskell-beginners] Type classes and synonyms

[Isaac Dupree]

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.