I don't think it really works for this, but the natural definition for
Maybe would seem to be

Maybe a = Yes a | No

On Nov 22, 2016 11:30 AM, "Will White" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I see.
>
> We’re happy using the ungrammatical Ok a for Results, so why not Thing a
> for Maybes?
>
> On 22 Nov 2016, at 13:06, 'Andrew Radford' via Elm Discuss <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think his point was if it was a Maybe List Int, then you would have
>
> 'A items'
>
> It still seems English is not up to this task :) We should probably just
> make up a new word, start using it day to day, then have it included in the
> OED. If it can be done for 'selfie
> <https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/selfie>', then we could do
> it for <insert candidate here>
>
> On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 10:35:48 UTC, Will White wrote:
>>
>> type Maybe thing = A thing | Nothing
>>
>> So with List.head list I’d get A 2 or Nothing.
>>
>> On 22 Nov 2016, at 10:20, Oliver Searle-Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> The problem with Some is that it should be A/An/Some depending on the
>> subject. I'm starting to come round to Thing vs Nothing. While the grammer
>> isn't spot on the semantics are very clear.
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 11:06:10 UTC+1, Will White wrote:
>>>
>>> weapon = Just sword doesn’t make sense for Maybe. It implies “just
>>> sword, out of all the weapons”. Just *would*make sense in a Just weapon
>>> | All (List weapon) type, where weapon could also be All [ sword, mace,
>>> nunchuk ].
>>>
>>> I think we all agree that Nothing totally nails its concept (better than
>>> null for the uninitiated). I'm just looking for a word that implies its
>>> alternative is Nothing, e.g. Thing, Something. If it’s grammatically
>>> correct, that’s a bonus, but I think eliminating things which hinder
>>> understanding is more important.
>>>
>>> On 22 Nov 2016, at 00:24, joseph ni <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I came to Elm not knowing about the Maybe type.
>>> The hardest thing for me to grasp was the use case and being able to map
>>> : (a -> b) -> Maybe a -> Maybe b. And knowing when to use a Maybe (rarely)
>>> vs when to use a union type or refactor the code so it doesn't need the
>>> Maybe type.
>>>
>>> If I was to qualitatively estimate the amount of time spent learning
>>> about Maybe. I'd say it took me a moment to understand `Maybe a = Just a |
>>> Nothing` and a couple of months to get comfortable enough with the Maybe
>>> type now to understand where it's needed in my app.
>>>
>>> So I'd tend to lean with Joey, the wording works for me and changing it
>>> would feel arbitrary and break the current grammatical 'symmetry' as in
>>> weapon = Just sword
>>> vs
>>> weapon = Something sword
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 08:19:21 UTC+11, Oliver Searle-Barnes wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have to admit I did find `Just` very confusing when I first
>>>> encountered it, as mentioned earlier in this thread it implies some kind of
>>>> limitation which doesn't match the semantics of Maybe at all. That said, it
>>>> was one of those little oddities that very quickly become second nature,
>>>> just wanted to point out that it is a slight bump in the road for 
>>>> newcomers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, 21 November 2016 18:34:05 UTC+1, Noah Hall wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone actually encountered anyone being confused by the names? I
>>>>> haven't. I think this a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Will White <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > I think that’s because you already know what Just means. I don’t
>>>>> think it’s
>>>>> > arbitrary though from an accessibility point of view. Some or None
>>>>> is easier
>>>>> > for newcomers to understand than Just or Nothing, especially as Some
>>>>> isn’t
>>>>> > misleading the way Just is, as Andrew described well.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On 21 Nov 2016, at 17:05, Joey Eremondi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Honestly, these choices seem pretty arbitrary. Everyone has a
>>>>> preference. ML
>>>>> > uses Some/None, Haskell uses Just/Nothing. Some people find Something
>>>>>
>>>>> > intuitive, some don't.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Given that the choices is (mostly) arbitrary, it seems best to stick
>>>>> with
>>>>> > the status quo.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:47 AM, 'Andrew Radford' via Elm Discuss
>>>>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Probably inherited from Haskell, like a lot of other stuff. Doubt
>>>>> if there
>>>>> >> was any other thought put into it if I'm honest.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Monday, 21 November 2016 14:46:40 UTC, Will White wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Sorry, meant to say “I guess he’s already considered and rejected
>>>>> them”.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On 21 Nov 2016, at 14:21, Will White <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> I prefer Some or None, for understanding. Though, unless Evan
>>>>> didn’t know
>>>>> >>> about them, I guess we’d already have them.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On 20 Nov 2016, at 23:41, Robin Heggelund Hansen <
>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> How about 'Some' and 'None'?
>>>>> >>> Those are not longer to type than what we have today, and they
>>>>> should
>>>>> >>> solve your initial confusion.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> søndag 20. november 2016 18.16.26 UTC+1 skrev Will White følgende:
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> I'm talking about Maybe.Just, of course. Just has always seemed
>>>>> strange
>>>>> >>>> to me, as if it's hinting that it's something other than just the
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>> counterpart to Nothing. I don't know the reasons behind its
>>>>> naming, but I
>>>>> >>>> think I would prefer Something, as in "something or nothing".
>>>>> What do you
>>>>> >>>> think?
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> --
>>>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in
>>>>> the
>>>>> >>> Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group.
>>>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>>>>> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFu
>>>>> o/unsubscribe.
>>>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>>>>>
>>>>> >>> [email protected].
>>>>> >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> --
>>>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups
>>>>> >> "Elm Discuss" group.
>>>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>> send an
>>>>> >> email to [email protected].
>>>>> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in
>>>>> the
>>>>> > Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group.
>>>>> > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>>>>> > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/
>>>>> unsubscribe.
>>>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>>>>> > [email protected].
>>>>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups
>>>>> > "Elm Discuss" group.
>>>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>> send an
>>>>> > email to elm-discuss...@googlegroups. <http://googlegroups.com/>com
>>>>> <http://googlegroups.com/>.
>>>>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
>>> Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.co
>>> m/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>>> [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
>> Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.co
>> m/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.
> com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Elm Discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm 
Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to