I don't think max would be a good choice, as that would mean that the default
multiplicity would have to be negative infinity (the identity element of max)
instead of 0, and then using Int as the type for multiplicity would not cut it.
greetings,
Sjoerd
On Apr 20, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Stefan Holdermans wrote:
> Wren,
>
>>> For a specific example, I haven't the faintest intuition about
>>> what 'map' should do. Suppose we have
>>> {(k1)x1, (k2)x2}
>>> and f x1 == f x2 = y. Should the value of map f {...} be
>>> {(k1+k2)y} or {(k1`max`k2)y} or what?
>>
>> Good question. I'd suppose that they should be parametrized by any
>> (Abelian?) group on the weights/multiplicities, where (+) is the canonical
>> one since we're talking about "negative" membership.
>
> Any groupoid on the multiplicities would do, I guess.
>
> As I wrote in my answer to Richard, max seems a better choise, as it nicely
> generalises mapping on sets.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Stefan
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
--
Sjoerd Visscher
sjo...@w3future.com
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
