Proposal: Add conspicuously missing Functor instances for tuples

[Alois Cochard]

+1

Agree for consistency, I can also see those instances as being useful in
some specific context, even if I agree with Andreas that in general they
should be discouraged (especially for newcomers).


On 19 January 2016 at 09:20, Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvriedel at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 2016-01-18 at 21:10:07 +0100, David Feuer wrote:
> > For some reason I really can't imagine, it seems the only tuple type
> > with a Functor instance is (,) a. I was astonished to find that
> >
> > fmap (+1) (1,2,3)
> >
> > doesn't work. Since this is *useful*, and there is *only one way to do
> > it*, I propose we add the following:
> >
> > instance Functor ((,,) a b) where
> >   fmap f (a,b,c) = (a,b,f c)
> > instance Functor ((,,,) a b c) where
> >   fmap f (a,b,c,d) = (a,b,c,f d)
> > etc.
>
> As stated elsewhere in this thread already, there is the issue about
> consistency. Here's a relevant section from the Haskell 2010 report[1]:
>
> > 6.1.4 Tuples
> >
> > ...
> >
> > However, every Haskell implementation must support tuples up to size
> > 15, together with the instances for Eq, Ord, Bounded, Read, and Show.
>
> IMO, we either have no `Functor` instances for tuples at all, or we have
> them for all tuples up to size 15. The current situations of having them
> defined only for 2-tuples is inconsistent.
>
>
> Cheers,
>   hvr
>
>  [1]:
> https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/haskell2010/haskellch6.html#x13-1210006.1.4
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>



-- 
*Λ\ois*
http://twitter.com/aloiscochard
http://github.com/aloiscochard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20160119/9736694f/attachment.html>