Proposal: Applicative => Monad: Is there any consensus?
ganesh.sittampalam at credit-suisse.com
Fri Feb 4 08:50:55 CET 2011
John Smith wrote:
> On 03/02/2011 16:42, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
>> (1) renaming fmap -> map
>> (2) adding join to Monad
>> (3) removing (>>) from Monad
>> (4) moving fail to MonadFail (this is a language change)
>> (5) adding Applicative as a superclass of Monad
>> .. and maybe anything else I missed
> This proposal (as in the patches attached to the ticket) is only (5).
> The wiki page is much broader than this.
The ticket is rather confusing, in that it says "The proposal is
detailed in the wiki". I see the followup comment that the attached
patches "only implement the new Applicative => Monad hierarchy, but do
not change any names (as proposed on the wiki page)", but that doesn't
indicate the status of the other things one way or the other.
Also, the relevant attached patch seems to at least add join to Monad:
Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer:
More information about the Libraries