Newest at the top
2025-04-01 14:25:42 +0200 | Googulator18 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-211a-ac5d-24c1-ad5e-7f2b.pool6.digikabel.hu) |
2025-04-01 14:25:24 +0200 | Googulator18 | (~Googulato@178-164-243-34.pool.digikabel.hu) (Quit: Client closed) |
2025-04-01 14:21:30 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
2025-04-01 14:20:15 +0200 | srk | (~sorki@user/srk) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
2025-04-01 14:17:00 +0200 | JuanDaugherty | (~juan@user/JuanDaugherty) JuanDaugherty |
2025-04-01 14:16:47 +0200 | <hellwolf> | makes sense. |
2025-04-01 14:16:41 +0200 | <hellwolf> | good to know. thanks hlint. |
2025-04-01 14:16:02 +0200 | <hellwolf> | just read the doc. |
2025-04-01 14:15:56 +0200 | <lambdabot> | parse error (possibly incorrect indentation or mismatched brackets) |
2025-04-01 14:15:56 +0200 | <lambdabot> | <hint>:1:64: error: |
2025-04-01 14:15:54 +0200 | <hellwolf> | > Bang patterns do not have any effect with constructor patterns: |
2025-04-01 14:15:22 +0200 | jespada | (~jespada@2800:a4:2256:6500:9933:8787:b375:7c3e) jespada |
2025-04-01 14:14:49 +0200 | <hellwolf> | This one I did not know. Why It is a "redundant bang pattern" using in line 4: https://paste.tomsmeding.com/1KVgpGax ? |
2025-04-01 14:00:51 +0200 | Smiles | (uid551636@id-551636.lymington.irccloud.com) Smiles |
2025-04-01 13:57:28 +0200 | tremon | (~tremon@83.80.159.219) tremon |
2025-04-01 13:46:48 +0200 | fp | (~Thunderbi@2001:708:150:10::1d80) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds) |
2025-04-01 13:46:13 +0200 | tromp | (~textual@2001:1c00:3487:1b00:29bc:7fae:9d9f:d545) (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…) |
2025-04-01 13:45:58 +0200 | __monty__ | (~toonn@user/toonn) toonn |
2025-04-01 13:44:21 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) merijn |
2025-04-01 13:41:09 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
2025-04-01 13:35:41 +0200 | tromp | (~textual@2001:1c00:3487:1b00:29bc:7fae:9d9f:d545) |
2025-04-01 13:31:12 +0200 | <Leary> | Indeed. |
2025-04-01 13:29:36 +0200 | <kqr> | I guess that is a vote in favour of Alternative? |
2025-04-01 13:24:39 +0200 | <lambdabot> | (["","a"],[Nothing,Just 'a']) |
2025-04-01 13:24:37 +0200 | <Leary> | > let test = [guard False $> 'a', guard True $> 'a'] in (test :: [String], test :: [Maybe Char]) |
2025-04-01 13:21:03 +0200 | toby-bro | (~toby-bro@user/toby-bro) toby-bro |
2025-04-01 13:20:24 +0200 | <Leary> | Well, generalising, yeah. I was thinking about `instance Semigroup a => Monoid (Maybe a)`. |
2025-04-01 13:19:48 +0200 | <merijn> | In fact, it's like, their main distinguishing feature :p |
2025-04-01 13:19:40 +0200 | <merijn> | Semigroups (pretty notably) do not have mempty |
2025-04-01 13:19:29 +0200 | <merijn> | Leary: You mean Monoid |
2025-04-01 13:18:53 +0200 | xff0x | (~xff0x@2405:6580:b080:900:974d:9d72:56de:9211) |
2025-04-01 13:18:34 +0200 | <Leary> | kqr: `mempty` would impose an unwanted `Semigroup` constraint. Also, I suspect you really want `guard`. |
2025-04-01 13:18:19 +0200 | <kqr> | Notably, this function only uses pure and empty, it never uses operators <|> or <> |
2025-04-01 13:17:33 +0200 | <kqr> | I guess another way to phrase the question would be "When a result is interpreted either as a Maybe a or [a], is Monoid or Alternative the most intuitive generalisation?" |
2025-04-01 13:16:53 +0200 | <kqr> | This is in a module-private function that is called by two other exported functions, one of which specialise it to Maybe a, and the other to [a] |
2025-04-01 13:16:18 +0200 | <merijn> | otoh, if the type is fixed to be Maybe, why not just write Nothing for readability |
2025-04-01 13:16:03 +0200 | <merijn> | kqr: If the type is fixed to be Maybe there is not distinction |
2025-04-01 13:15:08 +0200 | tromp | (~textual@2001:1c00:3487:1b00:29bc:7fae:9d9f:d545) (Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…) |
2025-04-01 13:09:16 +0200 | <kqr> | I could, of course, also return a plain `Nothing` but in this case I want the function to be generic over both Maybe values and lists. |
2025-04-01 13:08:58 +0200 | <kqr> | If I have a function returning a Maybe of something, and I want to return a Nothing, I can return `mempty` but I can also return `empty`. I have a rough intuition that `mempty` is more appropriate for things that are supposed to be aggregated together, whereas `empty` is more appropriate for things that are supposed to be used a choices. But how would I know which to use? |
2025-04-01 13:06:01 +0200 | Smiles | (uid551636@id-551636.lymington.irccloud.com) (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity) |
2025-04-01 13:05:01 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) merijn |
2025-04-01 13:02:20 +0200 | caconym | (~caconym@user/caconym) caconym |
2025-04-01 13:00:05 +0200 | caconym | (~caconym@user/caconym) (Quit: bye) |
2025-04-01 12:59:06 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@77.242.116.146) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
2025-04-01 12:58:48 +0200 | internatetional | (~nate@2400:9800:170:c23:1:0:419:21ae) (Quit: CoreIRC for Android - www.coreirc.com) |
2025-04-01 12:54:50 +0200 | ash3en | (~Thunderbi@149.222.150.125) ash3en |
2025-04-01 12:54:09 +0200 | acidjnk_new | (~acidjnk@p200300d6e71c4f8289e7d3d4c6144767.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) |
2025-04-01 12:53:56 +0200 | jathan | (~jathan@69.61.93.38) jathan |
2025-04-01 12:53:50 +0200 | unter-oe | (~unter-oe@user/unter-oe) (Remote host closed the connection) |