w3rs/reducers — comment on commit 7e34ce664564c2696b261bdf4f0dfe9af3750434
File:  line 0
By ekmett:

Not all of my packages are on hackage. More later.

Sent from my iPad

On Dec 3, 2011, at 5:00 AM, Alexey Karakulov wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Edward A. Kmett <
> reply@reply.github.com
>> wrote:
>
>> The cons vs mappend issue I'm on board with but renaming those functions
>> introduces alaising between the generator module and the semigroup reducers
>> which are needed to power it. This forces the use of qualified imports that
>> weren't needed before, and which break change the style of use and almost
>> every package I have that builds on top of this.
>>
>
> I did simple google search on
> hackage,
> and there is only one source
> filewhich
> imports both Generator and Reducer in non-explicit manner, and uses
> `reduce` function. I don't like `foldMapReduce` naming style because `fold`
> is synonym to `reduce` (in functional programming), and `foldMap` means the
> same as `mapReduce`, so `foldMapReduce` is like a tautology. And how to
> rename mine `mapMaybeReduce`? `foldMapMaybeReduce` is too long name for a
> quite simple function, and it's very unintuitive.
>
> If you have never used `foldMapReduce`-like functions in other packages,
> maybe you'd like to rename them to `mapReduce` fashion as I propose and
> move them to separate module, like `Data.Foldable.Reduce` or similar? This
> way we have no name ambiguity when we import both `Data.Generator` and
> `Data.Semigroup.Reducer` and still we have similar `mapReduce` API for
> Generator and Foldable.
>
>
>> There are more Generators than Foldables, since every Foldable can be made
>> into a generator, but things like Bytestring are generators but not
>> Foldable, hence the assignment of the longer (and different!) names to The
>> Foldable versions.
>>
>
> Generator is more powerful, but I mostly work with `Map`'s now, and it's
> more convenient for me to `foldMapReduce f map` than `mapReduce f (Values
> map)` if I don't need to use key values. Though, maybe I'll change my
> opinion and prefer Generator style in future.
>
> ---
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
> https://github.com/w3rs/reducers/commit/7e34ce664564c2696b261bdf4f0dfe9af3750434#commitcomment-766070