Proposal: add ifM and whenM to Control.Monad

[Mario Pastorelli]

On 04/21/2014 02:55 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 5:35 AM, Mario Pastorelli 
> <pastorelli.mario at gmail.com <mailto:pastorelli.mario at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 04/21/2014 10:41 AM, Simon Hengel wrote:
>
>             A quick heuristic grep over all Hackage packages results
>             in quite a bit
>             of packages containing the ifM/whenM/unlessM:
>
>         But that kind of shows that the "expected" names for those
>         functions are
>         ifM/whenM/unlessM.  I would ask the question:
>
>              Are there any other useful combinators that would be named
>              ifM/whenM/unlessM under the current naming convention?
>
>         If no, then I'm not entirely convinced that we should decide
>         against
>         what seems to be common intuition here.
>
>
>     Breaking API consistency because a lot of people are already doing
>     it doesn't feel right. If they 
>
>
> The API is there to serve its users, not really to dictate to them. If 
> the common convention is counter to the API structure, perhaps it is 
> the API that should change.
>

I agree with you but I'm not the developer of this API. Considering how 
important is Control.Monad for Haskell I think it's important to pick 
the right name for new functions.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20140421/1e60341f/attachment.html>