Wren gave what I think is the principal potential blocker: if we are to proceed with generalizing map, we really need to know the practical impact on foldr/build fusion.
NB: This is also a lingering concern for the Foldable/Traversable generalization.
That said, I do not believe these would be a problem as the RULES involved impact only a single instance, and these have worked well for me in the past.
Even so, having data would definitely go a long way towards assuaging fears of this sort!
-Edward
On Jun 21, 2013, at 6:11 PM, "wren ng thornton"
On 6/21/13 5:12 PM, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 04:53:49PM -0400, Carter Schonwald wrote:
I'd support the map=fmap thing,
Does it cause any consequences for existing libraries and programs? Does it break any existing Haskell98 (or Haskell2010) code?
If not: fine. But if yes: please don't do it.
As with the Foldable/Traversable stuff, there's the impediment of ensuring that list fusion still works right.
This is hopefully a minor issue and can be easily resolved by inlining/monomorphizing at the appropriate stage; however, it is a technical issue that needs to be addressed by the time we actually implement the change.
-- Live well, ~wren
_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries