One thing that I would like to respectfully point out - is that the members' of this library mailing list end up derailing otherwise useful conversations over the choice of a name, which is frankly a silly bottleneck. I would much rather roll a die or flip a coin to choose a name, and just get on to implementing the proposed thing, provided it is the case that it is seen as generally useful. On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Daniel Cartwright wrote:

I can definitely see "App" as being overloaded (Application). Good names that I see are "Ap" and "Apply".

I think "Ap" is fine. On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 10:28 AM David Feuer wrote:

...

I proposed same thing some time ago. The main point of contention was the name. I hope you have better luck!

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 10:23 AM Daniel Cartwright wrote:

...

I see this as being generally (as in, to the users of Haskell as a whole) useful:

newtype Ap f a = Ap { getAp :: f a } deriving (Applicative, Eq, Foldable, Functor, Generic, Generic1 ,Monad, Ord, Read, Show, Traversable)

Some hand-written instances: instance (Applicative f, Semigroup a) => Semigroup (Ap f a) where (Ap x) <> (Ap y) = Ap $ liftA2 (<>) x y

instance (Applicative f, Monoid a) => Monoid (Ap f a) where mempty = Ap $ pure mempty _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

So it's settled, we have an `Ed` type. On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 2:51 AM Edward Kmett wrote:

+1 to add it.

I don't care one way or the other about the name. =)

-Edward

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Daniel Cartwright

...

wrote:

...

One thing that I would like to respectfully point out - is that the members' of this library mailing list end up derailing otherwise useful conversations over the choice of a name, which is frankly a silly bottleneck. I would much rather roll a die or flip a coin to choose a name, and just get on to implementing the proposed thing, provided it is the case that it is seen as generally useful.

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Daniel Cartwright < chessai1996@gmail.com> wrote:

...

I can definitely see "App" as being overloaded (Application). Good names that I see are "Ap" and "Apply".

I think "Ap" is fine. On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 10:28 AM David Feuer wrote:

...

I proposed same thing some time ago. The main point of contention was the name. I hope you have better luck!

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 10:23 AM Daniel Cartwright wrote:

...

I see this as being generally (as in, to the users of Haskell as a whole) useful:

newtype Ap f a = Ap { getAp :: f a } deriving (Applicative, Eq, Foldable, Functor, Generic, Generic1 ,Monad, Ord, Read, Show, Traversable)

Some hand-written instances: instance (Applicative f, Semigroup a) => Semigroup (Ap f a) where (Ap x) <> (Ap y) = Ap $ liftA2 (<>) x y

instance (Applicative f, Monoid a) => Monoid (Ap f a) where mempty = Ap $ pure mempty _______________________________________________ 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

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