Result.mapX should be Result.foldlX ?

[listrophy]

It seems to me that Result.map2, Result.map3, etc should actually be called Result.foldl2, Result.foldl3, etc.

As I understand it, map should be fully parallelizable, applying a func to items in a list without regard to the other items in the list. On the other hand, foldl reduces the dimensionality of the input values, often from 2 to 1.

Going further, perhaps there should be a Result.foldl with the type signature: foldl : (a -> value -> value) -> value -> List (Result x a) -> Result x value

NB: Forgive my inexperience in the FP world... this issue is coming from my experience as an OO programmer. For example, I nearly submitted this issue with reduce rather than foldl. 😀

[process-bot]

Thanks for the issue! Make sure it satisfies this checklist. My human colleagues will appreciate it!

Here is what to expect next, and if anyone wants to comment, keep these things in mind.

[process-bot]

Thanks for the issue! Make sure it satisfies this checklist. My human colleagues will appreciate it!

Here is what to expect next, and if anyone wants to comment, keep these things in mind.

[jvoigtlaender]

If you want to discuss this, please bring it up in a community forum, for example the mailing list. Various options/channels are listed here: http://elm-lang.org/community.

This issue tracker here is not meant for such questions on API design and function names. It is really almost exclusively meant for bug reports.

[jvoigtlaender]

If you want to discuss this, please bring it up in a community forum, for example the mailing list. Various options/channels are listed here: http://elm-lang.org/community.

This issue tracker here is not meant for such questions on API design and function names. It is really almost exclusively meant for bug reports.