On 10/27/12 3:23 PM, Greg Fitzgerald wrote:
Should library functions target Control.Category? We write for Num,
IsString, and ListLike. Haskell overloads number literals and string
literals, and awkwardly not List literals. Should Haskell overload
function application too?
How cool would it be to be able to leverage all of Haskell's libraries, and
effectively none of the runtime, by implementing instances for literals and
function application? Say, for example, to generate a call graph, or make
the language strict, or target LLVM more directly. Anyone tried this?
Categories, as such, don't have any notion of application. There's just
the identity morphism and morphism composition.
Overloaded application is more the purview of Applicative, whence the
name (<$>) as a generalization of ($).
--
Live well,
~wren
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
