I'm opposed to changing the names in either module. In modern code it should be fairly rare to import Control.Arrow. In the cases that both are needed qualified imports are available, and it wouldn't be worth breaking existing code by renaming the class methods of Bifunctor.

On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:58 AM Alexandre Rodrigues <alexandrer_b@outlook.com> wrote:

Name collisions are always an issue, and I think you raise a valid point. However, in this case, does Haskell not already offer a solution? Qualified imports do add some overhead, but doing

```

import qualified Control.Arrow as A

import qualified Data.Bifunctor as B

foo :: Foo

foo = f . A.first . g

baz :: Baz

baz = h . B.first . i

```

does not seem too difficult.
On 08-05-2018 15:35, 박신환 wrote:
I had to import both Control.Arrow and Data.Bifunctor, and the name collision is annoying.

`first` and `second` from Data.Bifunctor should be given other names. I suggest (<$<) and (>$>), respectively.
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries