Re: moving Foldable and Traversable to Prelude

+1 for Functor/Monad On May 19, 2013, at 1:59 PM, Carter Schonwald wrote:

+1 on that functor monad bit

On Thursday, May 16, 2013, Edward Kmett wrote: I'd be +1 for doing that, too.

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 8:16 PM, John Lato wrote: -1, for the reasons given by Henning.

If we're going to be changing stuff in Prelude, why not start with Functor/Monad?

On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Henning Thielemann wrote:

On Wed, 15 May 2013, David Luposchainsky wrote:

+1. I think the Prelude should be a general module of the most commonly needed functions, which (generalized) folds and traversals are certainly part of; right now it feels more like a beginner module at times.

It is certainly a kind of beginner module, but that's good. Experts know how to import. Putting the most general functions into Prelude does not work because:

1. There are often multiple sensible generalizations of a Prelude function.

2. You have to add more type annotations since types cannot be infered from the functions.

There is simply no need to change Prelude and all packages that rely on specific types. Just don't be lazy and import the stuff you need!

I should change my vote to:

-10

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries