Data.Functor.unzipF (Was: Data.Map.unzip?)

Joachim Breitner mail at
Fri Dec 5 22:48:41 UTC 2014


Am Freitag, den 05.12.2014, 17:38 -0500 schrieb David Feuer:

>         Am Freitag, den 05.12.2014, 14:09 -0800 schrieb Eric Mertens:
>         > Would it be significantly better than just having/using the
>         following
>         > definition?
>         >
>         > unzipF :: Functor f => f (a, b) -> (f a, f b)
>         > unzipF x = (fmap fst x, fmap snd x)
>         yes, I guess that would be sufficient. Something for
>         Data.Functor?
> This looks like it should be the default implementation of an
> Unzippable class, rather than a standalone function.

Clearly, every Functor isunzippable.

What do you expect to be Unzippable that is not a functor?

Or are you worried about performance, and allow better implementations?
Then I hope we can do that without touching the desired API, e.g. using


Joachim “nomeata” Breitner
  mail at joachim-breitner.de
  Jabber: nomeata at  • GPG-Key: 0xF0FBF51F
  Debian Developer: nomeata at

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the Libraries mailing list