No real preference, but this does remind me that MonadZip probably should have the following extra law:

uncurry mzip . munzip = id

This law is passed by all current instances and fits the intent of much harder to state opposite facing information preservation law.

Since we continue to insist on this class containing the annoying munzip operation, this law is actually far easier to demonstrate than the existing law.

We can also restate the other information preservation law now that Functor is a superclass of Monad to the rather more succinct

() <$ ma = () <$ mb ==>  munzip (mzip ma mb) = (ma, mb)

-Edward

On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 4:54 PM, David Feuer <david.feuer@gmail.com> wrote:
MonadZip doesn't really explain how strict mzipWith and (especially)
munzip should be. For example, we could have

  munzip (Node (a, b) ts) = (Node a as, Node b bs)
    where (as, bs) = Data.List.unzip (map munzip ts)

or we could make some or all of the pattern matches lazy, or we could
use something lazier than Data.List.unzip, or we could make everything
completely spine-strict (surely unwise).

Does anyone have a particular preference, or a particular reason to
prefer one choice over others? If not, I think we should go with the
simple version above.

David Feuer
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries