17 Feb
2008
17 Feb
'08
6:33 a.m.
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 12:00:43AM -0800, Jonathan Cast wrote:
arr = pure pure = arr [...] This example is admittedly kind of silly, but I'm sure someone has a passionate attachment to one or both names, so requiring definitions to use one or the other would be controversial.
Perhaps not. I used the name pure for arr in the Fun of Programming paper, because Richard Bird preferred that name, but it hasn't caught on, and now the same name is used in the Applicative class. So perhaps it should be removed from Arrow.