I'm -1 on this just because it is a rather awkward idiom to use, the name doesn't really make much sense and it is less fundamental than many of the things we've rejected on those grounds in the past. ;)

-Edward

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:16 PM, John Wiegley <johnw@fpcomplete.com> wrote:
The function is:

    om f m = (m >>=) . flip f

Allowing this typical usage:

    om when (return True) $
        print "Hello"

Thus, it allows one to do away with the monadic variants of pure functions,
such as "whenM", "unlessM", etc.:

    whenM   = om when
    unlessM = om unless

"om" gets even more handy when you want to apply a monadic function to a
monadic value in yet another monad:

    >>> om for_ (return (Just True)) print
    True

Rather than the typical (which I must have written hundreds of times by now):

    mx <- return (Just x)
    for_ mx $ \x -> {- use x... -}


A rider to this proposal is to also add "nom = flip om", but I can live
without that one.  "om", however, is handy enough that I've started locally
defining in all the modules where I find myself now reaching for it.

--
John Wiegley
FP Complete                         Haskell tools, training and consulting
http://fpcomplete.com               johnw on #haskell/irc.freenode.net

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