[Haskell-cafe] What do you call Applicative Functor Morphism?

Dan Doel dan.doel at gmail.com
Sat Nov 6 02:27:59 EDT 2010

On Saturday 06 November 2010 2:09:13 am Sebastian Fischer wrote:
> Is there a deeper reason why people use "morphism" and not
> "homomorphism" or is it just because it's shorter?

I don't really know. But that's (one) standard terminology in category theory. 
Objects and morphisms.

It may be due to there being multiple prefixes in category theory that you can 
add to that:


In that light, it makes some sense to have the default be just "morphism," 
rather than the additional homo- prefix.

-- Dan

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list