Generalizing map?

[Nikita Volkov]

I can't +1 this enough to express how much I desire that change!

2015-03-13 12:32 GMT+03:00 Fumiaki Kinoshita <fumiexcel at gmail.com>:

> A dozen of functions like concat, foldr, mapM, have been generalized
> through BBP.
>
> Then, why do we leave `map` just for lists? Obviously `map` can be
> generalized, so
>
> map :: Functor f => (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
> map = fmap
>
> The current definition of `map` looks too special to be a special case of
> mapM (map f = runIdentity . mapM (Identity . f)).
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20150313/9bf44d5c/attachment.html>