(Changing the subject as it's going off-topic from the original email :p) On 25 May 2011 22:45, Simon Meier <iridc...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/5/25 Ivan Lazar Miljenovic <ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com>: >> >> Also, by clashes with Applicative, are you referring to empty and <$> >> ? I'm not sure if a better name than "empty" can be found; as for >> <$>, maybe using pretty's notation of $$ and $+$ rather than <$> and >> <$$> ? > > What about 'emptyDoc'?
It's a bit more of a mouthful, and getting a bit close to Hungarian Notation, isn't it? :p Also, empty is already used a fair amount in other libraries as it stands (admittedly, most of those are in modules that are typically imported qualified...). > Moreover, if you are changing the names of > combinators, then moving them away from Applicative and Arrow would be > a good idea; i.e., don't use <+>, as it already used by ArrowPlus. *sigh* We really need to get a list of used operators somewhere so that libraries can stake a claim :p > Moreover, if you can make a Monoid instance such that `mappend` equals > <>, you would also make the library compatible to a future > introduction of (<>) = mappend. I was thinking about that actually... -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
