* Manuel Gómez <tar...@gmail.com> [2013-05-23 08:33:15-0430] > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Roman Cheplyaka <r...@ro-che.info> wrote: > > Pull requests are welcome, but let's stick to widely agreed changes > > (like the Foldable/Traversable one). I think one of the reasons why > > other Preludes haven't been adopted is because they were too radical. > > > > * Andreas Abel <andreas.a...@ifi.lmu.de> [2013-05-20 13:26:05+0200] > >> Maybe instead of fiddling with the current Prelude (which might break > >> backwards compatibility), we should design a new prelude which is not > >> automatically loaded but contains roughly the current prelude (with > >> the list functions generalized to collections) plus the "modern" type > >> class stack: Functor, Applicative, Monad, Foldable, Traversable, > >> Monoid etc. > > Is this strategy adequate for attacking the issue of the type class > stack, though? Defining, say, a new Monad class with the desired > Functor constraint wouldn’t be of much use, as everything else on > Hackage (and on the GHC libraries!) would still use the “real” Monad.
No, it definitely isn't. Roman _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
