Hi. I have written the following function for "iterating" over all set bits in a Bits instance: foldBits :: (Bits bits, Num bits) => (a -> Int -> a) -> a -> bits -> a foldBits _ a 0 = a foldBits f a n = foldBits f (f a lsb) (n `clearBit` lsb) where lsb = countTrailingZeros n The type signature mimmicks foldl. However, composing several calls to foldBits ends up pretty messy: foldBits f (foldBits f (foldBits f [] value1) value2) value3 So I was thinking, maybe I should just flip the final arguments to make composition easier: fooBits :: (Bits bits, Num bits) => (a -> Int -> a) -> bits -> a -> a fooBits _ 0 a = a foldBits f n a = foldBits f (n `clearBit` lsb) (f a lsb) where lsb = countTrailingZeros n fooBits f value3 . fooBits f value2 . fooBits f value1 $ [] This looks more tidy. However, now that I am no longer mimmicking foldl, I am sort of at a loss how to name this beast. iterBits comes to bind, but this isn't really like iterate. I know, this question might look silly, but good naming conventions seem to make it easier for me to reason about the code. Any suggestions? P.S.: Mimmicking foldl is probably wrong as well, since this isn't really a fold, is it? -- CYa, ⡍⠁⠗⠊⠕