Re: [Haskell-cafe] How to spot Monads, Applicatives ...

If it makes sense to apply a "Foo of functions" to a value,

That's just a functor. "fmap ($ value) foos". But yes, if you want to do this with more than one foo (or functions inside a foo), then you need applicative. e.g. (+) <$> [1,2,3] <*> [10,20,30] On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:29 AM, John Wiegley wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

martin writes:

...

I am at a stage, where I can use some of the Monads and Applicatives which are out there. But I hardly ever wrote my own instances. I am curious to learn about the thought processes which lead to the insight "hey that can be written nicely as an Applicative Functor"

When I realize Monad might be useful:

If it makes sense for a "Foo of Foos" (over some type) to be reduced to a Foo.

When I realize Applicative might be useful:

If it makes sense to apply a "Foo of functions" to a value, or a function taking two or more arguments to two or more Foos, throughout those Foos.

-- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2 _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe