Re: Make Prelude's map = fmap (Nikita Volkov)

+1 I'm in favor of generalizing `map`. At first I was wary of less monomorphic types, but now I've found that it's not that hard to just lie and pretend the type is more specialized when teaching. Plus, `map` is a much nicer name than `fmap`. Since there's been so many suggestions concerning radically changing the
Prelude recently, I'd like to start a poll on a subject. I know that "map" is limited to lists for the beginners, but then we're already making a lot of unbeginnerish changes to Prelude. Also it's not a monad transformer, but just a functor - how can a person learn Haskell without understanding what a Functor is?

Gabriel Gonzalez
writes:
I'm in favor of generalizing `map`. At first I was wary of less monomorphic types, but now I've found that it's not that hard to just lie and pretend the type is more specialized when teaching. Plus, `map` is a much nicer name than `fmap`.
+1, pending results on how it affects foldr/build fusion. -- John Wiegley FP Complete Haskell tools, training and consulting http://fpcomplete.com johnw on #haskell/irc.freenode.net

On Fri, 21 Jun 2013, Gabriel Gonzalez wrote:
+1
I'm in favor of generalizing `map`. At first I was wary of less monomorphic types, but now I've found that it's not that hard to just lie and pretend the type is more specialized when teaching. Plus, `map` is a much nicer name than `fmap`.
We could also have Functor.map, if people would get familiar with qualified imports.
participants (3)
-
Gabriel Gonzalez
-
Henning Thielemann
-
John Wiegley