What about `pure`? It's already used in applicative, and has the
motivation that it's embedding a pure value in some context. Since I
don't know the details of your project, I don't know if you need two
names (one for the applicative version, and one for the monadic
version).
Erik
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 7:14 AM, J. Stutterheim
Dear Cafe,
Suppose we now have the opportunity to change the name of the `return` function in Monad, what would be a "better" name for it? (for some definition of better)
N.B. I am _not_ proposing that we actually change the name of `return`. I do currently have the opportunity to pick names for common functions in a non-Haskell related project, so I was wondering if there perhaps is a better name for `return`.
- Jurriën _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe