You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently we have foldl and foldlM functions whose signatures are more general than the standard ones and inline with the foldl library. It means that they are slightly different from the standard fold functions. To keep full compatibility with the nomenclature of standard lists and Foldable we should perhaps use different names for the functions created for the purposes of foldl.
The names foldl, foldl', foldl1 are all taken. The name fold is used by Foldable typeclass. If we are not going to have a Foldable instance we can use fold, foldM for these general functions. Note that we also have scan that is a general version of scanl.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It might make sense to provide a fold and a foldMap function in line with the Foldable typeclass. So those names should probably not be reused.
How about foldx and foldxM where the x can be thought of as a mnemonic for extraction function required in the foldl library compatible fold functions?
Currently we have
foldl
andfoldlM
functions whose signatures are more general than the standard ones and inline with thefoldl
library. It means that they are slightly different from the standard fold functions. To keep full compatibility with the nomenclature of standard lists and Foldable we should perhaps use different names for the functions created for the purposes offoldl
.The names
foldl
,foldl'
,foldl1
are all taken. The namefold
is used byFoldable
typeclass. If we are not going to have aFoldable
instance we can usefold
,foldM
for these general functions. Note that we also havescan
that is a general version ofscanl
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: