[Haskell-cafe] flip1 through flip9, useful?

[Ivan Lazar Miljenovic]

On 14 January 2014 16:48, Christian Marie <christian at ponies.io> wrote:
> I have defined a bunch of functions like this:
>
>         -- | Move the fourth argument to the first place
>         rotate4 :: (a -> b -> c -> d -> e) -> (d -> a -> b -> c -> e)
>
>         -- | Reverse four arguments
>         flip4 :: (a -> b -> c -> d -> e) -> (d -> c -> b -> a -> e)
>
> I decided to upload this as a library to hackage, as I personally find it
> useful, especially for writing FFI bindings.
>
> It seems like I can't be the first to write a library like this though, am I
> missing something obvious? Is this useful or stupid? Does it exist already?
>
> Full definition here:
>
> https://github.com/christian-marie/flippers/blob/master/src/Control/Flippers.hs

Except for completeness, I don't see the point of rotate1 and flip1.

I'd also be tempted to possibly shift the module to
Data.Function.Flippers (as flip is re-exported by Data.Function in
base, and it seems like a more valid location to me).

That said, whilst I do use flip upon occasion, I think in the general
case it'd be too easy to abuse these kinds of functions and could be
more difficult to work any errors if you used the wrong one or had
some arguments in the wrong order.

-- 
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com
http://IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com