Proposal: Add a strict version of <$> for monads

[Carter Schonwald]

could someone explain to me why this <$!> would be for monads rather being
more generally also for functors or applicatives?


On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com>wrote:

> I'm trying to figure out whether this is a property of the functor itself.
> I guess it is, but at the same time it seems somewhat orthogonal whether to
> `seq` some value`.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Twan van Laarhoven <twanvl at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On 29/11/13 12:23, Johan Tibell wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Twan van Laarhoven <twanvl at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:twanvl at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     I don't like that this function is implemented for Monads, I think
>>> that it
>>>     makes sense for some other functors as well. Though to do this
>>> 'properly' we
>>>     would probably end up with another typeclass "StrictFunctor" or
>>> something,
>>>     and that is perhaps too much unnecessary complexity.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you have an example of such a functor?
>>>
>>> -- Johan
>>>
>>
>> The first thing that came to mind was ZipList. Perhaps a more realistic
>> example would be parsing combinator or FRP libraries that are applicative
>> but not monadic.
>>
>>
>> Twan
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20131129/3c672895/attachment.html>