Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

“Nopes to Yeps” Thanks Mark.

> On 1 Dec 2016, at 07:25, Will White  wrote:
> 
> “those will go from a series of No’s to a series of Yes’s” would also make 
> sense.
> 
>> On 30 Nov 2016, at 21:42, Will White > > wrote:
>> 
>> This is what it comes down to for me:
>> 
>> Richard F talking about Maybes: https://youtu.be/IcgmSRJHu_8?t=9m21s 
>> 
>> 
>> He says "those will go from a series of Nothings to a series of Justs".
>> 
>> Thing a | Nothing would mean he'd say "those will go from a series of 
>> Nothings to a series of Things" which makes more sense with the semantics of 
>> Maybe and which makes more sense to the uninitiated listener.
>> 
>> On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 5:16:26 PM UTC, Will White wrote:
>> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe 
>> .
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

“those will go from a series of No’s to a series of Yes’s” would also make 
sense.

> On 30 Nov 2016, at 21:42, Will White  wrote:
> 
> This is what it comes down to for me:
> 
> Richard F talking about Maybes: https://youtu.be/IcgmSRJHu_8?t=9m21s
> 
> He says "those will go from a series of Nothings to a series of Justs".
> 
> Thing a | Nothing would mean he'd say "those will go from a series of 
> Nothings to a series of Things" which makes more sense with the semantics of 
> Maybe and which makes more sense to the uninitiated listener.
> 
> On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 5:16:26 PM UTC, Will White wrote:
> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe 
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Duane Johnson]

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Joey Eremondi 
wrote:

> To me this makes no sense. Maybe implies uncertainty: it's either there or
> it's not.


I think the beauty Witold was pointing to is in the way the `case`
statement reads, not the way the type reads on its own. Reading "case of
maybe this, or maybe that" made the suggestion make sense to me.

That said, how about "Is"?

type Maybe a = Is a | Nothing

case msg of
Is This -> ...
Is That -> ...
Nothing -> ...


To be or not to be... that is the question :)

Duane

-- 
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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Tyler Perkins]

Agreed! Back when I started learning Haskell, I was delighted how a Maybe t 
could be a Just t or Nothing. The choice of names was perfect: succinct, 
colloquial, yet precise. The problem, I think, is that novices use numbers 
for toy examples, so "Just 3" is read as "no greater than 3". But when you 
realize that x can be any type, "Just x" clearly means "just this one 
thing, x, with nothing else happening".

Later, I learned that Scala's Option[T] type (a much more overloaded name 
than "Maybe") used Some[T] and None. *Yuk!*, I thought. "Some" has a 
conflicting set theory meaning, "at *least* one". And "None" means 
"cardinality of zero", both of which could mislead you to think we're 
talking about a collection of *arbitrary* size, not just 0 or 1. That's 
*imprecise* terminology.

Some say they were confused by Just, thinking maybe the alternative to Just 
t might be more-than-one-t" rather than Nothing. Yes, the alternative 
*could* be more than one, but that would be a different type. That's the 
point, isn't it? A type is a description, and you need to read the *whole* 
description. Sometimes, being confused is a *good* thing! The Maybe type 
was a new concept to you, and that state of confusion was your subconscious 
mind telling you that some hard thinking was required. There's no getting 
away from that!

On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 10:34:05 AM UTC-7, 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  > 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  > 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 
> >  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  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  
> >>> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe. 
>
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> >>> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com. 
> >>> 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.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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe. 
> > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> > elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com . 
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups 
> > "Elm 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Joey Eremondi]

>
> type Maybe a = Nothing | Maybe a
>

To me this makes no sense. Maybe implies uncertainty: it's either there or
it's not. But in the case that it's there, there's no uncertainty. Maybe 3
isn't uncertain, we know that the value is there. The uncertainty is in the
type, before you pattern match, when there's two possibilities. The name
should reflect which possibility it is.

Also, new people already have enough problems confusing the Type and
Constructor namespaces, this would make that worse.



On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Zinggi  wrote:

> I love this!
> I've read through the whole thread, but for every suggestion so far I
> thought: "meh, 'Just a' sounds better".
> But this looks even better!
>
> On Friday, 25 November 2016 10:03:54 UTC+1, Witold Szczerba wrote:
>>
>> I have it, I have it, look at this:
>>
>> type Maybe a = Nothing | Maybe a
>>
>> It's very popular to name constructor after type in many languages.
>>
>> case msg of
>> Maybe This -> ...
>> Maybe That -> ...
>> Nothing -> ...
>>
>> Also, "Just" is just fine as well.
>>
>> 24.11.2016 10:21 PM "Michael B"  napisał(a):
>>
>>> Maybe a = Nothing | Such a
>>>
>>> elm = Such wow
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.com.
>>> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Zinggi]

I love this!
I've read through the whole thread, but for every suggestion so far I 
thought: "meh, 'Just a' sounds better".
But this looks even better!

On Friday, 25 November 2016 10:03:54 UTC+1, Witold Szczerba wrote:
>
> I have it, I have it, look at this:
>
> type Maybe a = Nothing | Maybe a
>
> It's very popular to name constructor after type in many languages.
>
> case msg of
> Maybe This -> ...
> Maybe That -> ...
> Nothing -> ...
>
> Also, "Just" is just fine as well.
>
> 24.11.2016 10:21 PM "Michael B"  
> napisał(a):
>
>> Maybe a = Nothing | Such a
>>
>> elm = Such wow
>>
>> --
>> 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.com .
>> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Witold Szczerba]

I have it, I have it, look at this:

type Maybe a = Nothing | Maybe a

It's very popular to name constructor after type in many languages.

case msg of
Maybe This -> ...
Maybe That -> ...
Nothing -> ...

Also, "Just" is just fine as well.

24.11.2016 10:21 PM "Michael B"  napisał(a):

> Maybe a = Nothing | Such a
>
> elm = Such wow
>
> --
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Mark Hamburg]

It didn't take any adaptation that I recall to get used to Just and
Nothing. In fact, I probably made more errors on Nothing.

But if there were a real move to rename the cases to be more "friendly" —
which I doubt — then I will offer the colloquially friendly:

Maybe a = Yep a | Nope

Yes/No would be better and would be proper answers to the question implied
by Maybe, but they are also more likely to already be in use.

I think Just/Nothing probably just survives.

Mark

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 3:50 PM Erkal Selman  wrote:

> *Thing a | Nothing *is also my favourite between the proposed ones.
>
> If the type label is thought of as an adjactive, like for example, in
>
> type *Entry* = *Male Person* *| Female Person *
>
> then *Just* makes more sense.
>
> However, my observation is that these type labels are more often named
> after nouns, like in
>
> type *Angle *=* Radian Float | Degree Float*
>
> In this case, *Thing* is makes more sense.
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Will White 
> wrote:
>
> The fact that you have to have a way of making sense of it is exactly my
> point. I think if it was Thing a | Nothing you wouldn’t have to do this to
> understand it.
>
> On 23 Nov 2016, at 22:01, Erkal Selman  wrote:
>
> I don't have a strong opinion about this issue, but here is why *Just*
> makes sense to me:
>
> Say that you have the type *Maybe Int*.
> A value of this type can be *Nothing*, or it can be, for example, *Just*
> 42.
> It  cannot be *Error* 42 or *Person* 42, it can be *just* 42.
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 7:06:14 PM UTC+1, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> :)
>
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 10:59:24 AM UTC-7, Rex van der Spuy
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:15:50 PM UTC-5, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> My opinion on this isn't nothing, it's just that just makes the most sense.
>
>
> Maybe.
>
>
>
> --
> 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
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Erkal Selman]

*Thing a | Nothing *is also my favourite between the proposed ones.

If the type label is thought of as an adjactive, like for example, in

type *Entry* = *Male Person* *| Female Person *

then *Just* makes more sense.

However, my observation is that these type labels are more often named
after nouns, like in

type *Angle *=* Radian Float | Degree Float*

In this case, *Thing* is makes more sense.

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Will White  wrote:

> The fact that you have to have a way of making sense of it is exactly my
> point. I think if it was Thing a | Nothing you wouldn’t have to do this to
> understand it.
>
> On 23 Nov 2016, at 22:01, Erkal Selman  wrote:
>
> I don't have a strong opinion about this issue, but here is why *Just*
> makes sense to me:
>
> Say that you have the type *Maybe Int*.
> A value of this type can be *Nothing*, or it can be, for example, *Just*
> 42.
> It  cannot be *Error* 42 or *Person* 42, it can be *just* 42.
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 7:06:14 PM UTC+1, Daniel Walker wrote:
>>
>> :)
>>
>> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 10:59:24 AM UTC-7, Rex van der Spuy
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:15:50 PM UTC-5, Daniel Walker
>>> wrote:

 My opinion on this isn't nothing, it's just that just makes the most
 sense.

>>>
>>> Maybe.
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> 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
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@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.com/d/
> topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

The fact that you have to have a way of making sense of it is exactly my point. 
I think if it was Thing a | Nothing you wouldn’t have to do this to understand 
it.

> On 23 Nov 2016, at 22:01, Erkal Selman  wrote:
> 
> I don't have a strong opinion about this issue, but here is why Just makes 
> sense to me:
> 
> Say that you have the type Maybe Int.
> A value of this type can be Nothing, or it can be, for example, Just 42.
> It  cannot be Error 42 or Person 42, it can be just 42.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 7:06:14 PM UTC+1, Daniel Walker wrote:
> :)
> 
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 10:59:24 AM UTC-7, Rex van der Spuy wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:15:50 PM UTC-5, Daniel Walker wrote:
> My opinion on this isn't nothing, it's just that just makes the most sense.
> 
> Maybe.
>  
> 
> -- 
> 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 
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Daniel Walker]

:)

On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 10:59:24 AM UTC-7, Rex van der Spuy 
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:15:50 PM UTC-5, Daniel Walker wrote:
>>
>> My opinion on this isn't nothing, it's just that just makes the most 
>> sense.
>>
>
> Maybe.
>  
>

-- 
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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Rex van der Spuy]

On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:15:50 PM UTC-5, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> My opinion on this isn't nothing, it's just that just makes the most sense.
>

Maybe.
 

-- 
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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Daniel Walker]

My opinion on this isn't nothing, it's just that just makes the most sense.

On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 6:11:31 PM UTC-7, Nick H wrote:
>
> OK, here are the suggestions so far:
>
> type Maybe a = ...
>
> Nothing | Just a
> Nothing | Something a
> None | Some a
> NoValue | Some a
> Nothing | Some a
> Nothing | The a
> Nothing | A a
> Nothing | Thing a
> NoThing | Thing a
> Nothing | Have a
> Nothing | Got a
> Null | NotNull a
> No | Yes a
> Empty | Full a
>
> (I just added that last one.)
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:46 PM, David Andrews  > wrote:
>
>> 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"  
>> 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 <
>>> elm-d...@googlegroups.com > 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 
>>> ', then we could 
>>> do it for 
>>>
>>> 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  
 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  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  
>>> 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  
>>> wrote: 
>>> > 
>>> > Honestly, these choices seem pretty arbitrary. Everyone has a 
>>> preference. ML 
>>> > uses Some/None, Haskell uses Just/Nothing. Some 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Nick H]

OK, here are the suggestions so far:

type Maybe a = ...

Nothing | Just a
Nothing | Something a
None | Some a
NoValue | Some a
Nothing | Some a
Nothing | The a
Nothing | A a
Nothing | Thing a
NoThing | Thing a
Nothing | Have a
Nothing | Got a
Null | NotNull a
No | Yes a
Empty | Full a

(I just added that last one.)


On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:46 PM, David Andrews  wrote:

> 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"  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 <
>> elm-discuss@googlegroups.com> 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
>> ', then we could do
>> it for 
>>
>> 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 
>>> 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  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 
>> 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 
>> 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
>> >  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Probably 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[David Andrews]

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"  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 <
> elm-discuss@googlegroups.com> 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
> ', then we could do
> it for 
>
> 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  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  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 
> 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  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
> >  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  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I prefer Some or None, for understanding. Though, unless Evan
> didn’t know
> >>> about them, I guess we’d already have them.
> 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

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 
>  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 
> ', then we could do it 
> for 
> 
> 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 opsb.co.uk 
>> > 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 wouldmake 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 gmail.com 
>>> > 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 > 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 > 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 
>>> > > 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 > 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 >> >>> <>> 
>>> >>> wrote: 
>>> >>> 
>>> >>> How about 'Some' and 'None'? 
>>> >>> Those are not 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Robin Heggelund Hansen]

'A itemList' ;-)

tirsdag 22. november 2016 14.06.17 UTC+1 skrev Andrew Radford følgende:
>
> 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 
> ', then we could do 
> it for 
>
> 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  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  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  
> 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  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 
> >  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  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 <
> skinn...@gmail.com> 
> >>> wrote: 
> >>> 
> >>> How about 'Some' and 'None'? 
> >>> Those are not longer to type than what we have 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

['Andrew Radford' via Elm Discuss]

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 
', then we could do it 
for 

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  > 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  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  
 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  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 
 >  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  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 <
 skinn...@gmail.com> 
 >>> 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 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

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  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 wouldmake 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 gmail.com 
>> > 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 > 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 > 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 
>> > > 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 > 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 > 
>> >>> 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 
>> >>> 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Oliver Searle-Barnes]

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  
> 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  
>>> 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  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 
>>> >  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  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  
>>>
>>> >>> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe. 
>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>>> >>> 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

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  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 > 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 > 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 
> > > 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 > 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 > 
> >>> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe 
> >>> . 
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> >>> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com <>. 
> >>> 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 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[joseph ni]

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  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  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 
>> >  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  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  
>>
>> >>> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe. 
>>
>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> >>> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com. 
>> >>> 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.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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe. 
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> > elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com. 
>> > 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 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Oliver Searle-Barnes]

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  > 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  > 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 
> >  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  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  
> >>> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe. 
>
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> >>> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com. 
> >>> 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.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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe. 
> > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> > elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com . 
> > 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.com . 
> > 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

I like that!

type Maybe thing = Some thing | Nothing

> On 21 Nov 2016, at 18:31, William Bailey  wrote:
> 
> type Maybe value = Some value | NoValue
> 
> -- 
> 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 
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[William Bailey]

type Maybe value = Some value | NoValue

-- 
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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Peter Damoc]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Will White  wrote:

> I remember being confused by Just, and I still find it awkward.
>


It matters less if some other places call it Option
 and the
cases have different names.
If one cares about the idea and the things it allows, they will use it as
it is and move on with the problem at hand.

There will always be people who arrive here with a different background.
There is no way to accommodate all.
So, the only sensible choice is for people accommodate themselves to Elm.

I care less if it is "Some value" or "Just value". Both sound and express
the idea equally well to me.
I will use whatever is there.

-- 
There is NO FATE, we are the creators.
blog: http://damoc.ro/

-- 
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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[OvermindDL1]

I highly doubt it would ever be changed, but I significantly prefer the 
OCaml style Some/None to Haskell's Just/Nothing as well.

Although `Thing` and `NoThing` could by funny and descriptive both.  ^.^


On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 10:48:11 AM UTC-7, Will White wrote:
>
> I remember being confused by Just, and I still find it awkward. Hearing 
> Richard F. explain it in his introductory Elm talk 
>  is what prompted me to start 
> this discussion.
>
> On 21 Nov 2016, at 17:33, 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  > 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  
> 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
>  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  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 
> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
> 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.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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com .
> 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.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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com .
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Joey Eremondi]

True, I like Just because I'm familiar with it. But its name isn't obvious.
Some isn't obvious. Something isn't obvious.

There's really, two ways to understand Just. One is to listen to an
explanation like what Richard gives. The other is to see the definition:

type Maybe a = Just a | Nothing.

A Maybe either contains an "a", which we call the "Just" case, or it
contains no arguments, which we call "Nothing".

"Just" is a mnemonic. It's not the "meaning" of the constructor, it's just
a handy name that lets us get at it. The meaning is the two cases above,
the shape of the type. No name, no matter how informative, can capture that
full meaning.

Honestly, if we're appealing to JS developers, and wanted to change the
name, I'd say "Null" and "NotNull" are the two easiest. But I still prefer
the status quo to this.

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Will White  wrote:

> I remember being confused by Just, and I still find it awkward. Hearing
> Richard F. explain it in his introductory Elm talk
>  is what prompted me to start
> this discussion.
>
> On 21 Nov 2016, at 17:33, 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 
> 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  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
>  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  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 
> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@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.com/d/
> topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> 

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

I remember being confused by Just, and I still find it awkward. Hearing Richard 
F. explain it in his introductory Elm talk 
 is what prompted me to start this 
discussion.

> On 21 Nov 2016, at 17:33, 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  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  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
>>  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  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 
 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
 To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
 elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
 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+unsubscr...@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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> 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+unsubscr...@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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Noah Hall]

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  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  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
>  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  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 
>>> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>>> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
>>> 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+unsubscr...@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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

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  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 
> > 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 > 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 > 
>>> 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe 
>>> .
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>>> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com <>.
>>> 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+unsubscr...@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.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe 
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Joey Eremondi]

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 <
elm-discuss@googlegroups.com> 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  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 
>> 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/to
>> pic/elm-discuss/EHnuE_gGFuo/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>> elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
>> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

Sorry, meant to say “I guess he’s already considered and rejected them”.

> On 21 Nov 2016, at 14:21, Will White  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 > > 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_gGFuo/unsubscribe 
>> .
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Witold Szczerba]

Something would be too long in my opinion.

20.11.2016 6:16 PM "Will White"  napisał(a):

> 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 the Google Groups
> "Elm Discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[elm-discuss] Rename Just to Something, as the counterpart to Nothing?

[Will White]

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 the Google Groups "Elm 
Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.