-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 21/04/14 17:47, Edward Kmett wrote:
I, for one, could get behind just taking ifM, whenM, unlessM for these operations, proper naming conventions aside.
They've been independently reinvented in 60+ packages with these exact names.
If we do this, over time we'll save another 60+ packages the trouble of doing the same thing. This looks pragmatic now, but I, for one, think that in the future we would be appreciative of our decision to stick to conventions instead of giving in to the slippery slope of myopic pragmatism.
In any event it looks like consensus is to add these functions. Perhaps a vote thread with name options should be opened (at a later stage). - -- Alexander alexander@plaimi.net https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlNVPwoACgkQRtClrXBQc7X2RQD9H+3c4wR/M8pVU4km1Za0lnhH sTRLQMZkhqw3zbi0gfABAKXX1qi9HO7x2Fyb2cWbiPvFRiNCrrxVSHe8KyQkLZ72 =xR1X -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----