> > I'm not sure having a Monoid class is actually useful for anything - but if > we must have it, there seems to be little better possible name for something > so vague. >
IMO the Monoid class is useful since, if you define mempty and mappend, you get mconcat for free. I don't see what the problem is. Most people will accept Functor, as it used a lot. Monoid might be less used, but if you reject it, then by principle you must just as well reject Functor, and any other type classes.
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
