-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rename NaturalTransformation to FunctionK. #1072
Rename NaturalTransformation to FunctionK. #1072
Conversation
@@ -166,14 +166,14 @@ DSL. By itself, this DSL only represents a sequence of operations | |||
To do this, we will use a *natural transformation* between type | |||
containers. Natural transformations go between types like `F[_]` and | |||
`G[_]` (this particular transformation would be written as | |||
`NaturalTransformation[F,G]` or as done here using the symbolic | |||
`FunctionK[F,G]` or as done here using the symbolic | |||
alternative as `F ~> G`). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This could then be something like :
To do this, we will use a
FunctionK
(also known as a natural transformation). AFunctionK
is like a function but between type containers instead of values. AFunctionK
between typesF[_]
andG[_]
could be written asFunctionK[F, G]
(or asF ~> G
using the symbolic alternative).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would say that we can describe the type FunctionK
as a natural transformation. So, when we would put the term in backticks (i.e. code) we'd say FunctionK
but otherwise we'd say transformation or natural transformation. Does this make sense?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That does make sense, yes. It felt weird to use FunctionK
in the documentation, that's why I left the documentation itself untouched.
This is great, thanks! I think for now we should remove Relatedly, I think we should remove the |
Current coverage is 88.37%
@@ master #1072 diff @@
==========================================
Files 221 215 -6
Lines 2798 2743 -55
Methods 2743 2689 -54
Messages 0 0
Branches 50 49 -1
==========================================
- Hits 2472 2424 -48
+ Misses 326 319 -7
Partials 0 0
|
19cacbd
to
637a0b9
Compare
@peterneyens thanks, this looks great! Sorry, but it has a merge conflict. Would you mind resolving it? |
637a0b9
to
8509cd4
Compare
Perfect. 👍 Thanks! |
👍 |
This would rename
NaturalTransformation
toFunctionK
#1065, but we should probably wait until some more people have expressed their opinion about this change ?I'm also not sure how to change the documentation, should we go from "a natural transformation" to "a
FunctionK
".