# Difference between revisions of "The Other Prelude"

Nmessenger (talk | contribs) (Formatting, small code changes, moved method synonyms outside classes to enforce consistency (choices were arbitrary, change if you want)) |
Uchchwhash (talk | contribs) m (→See also) |
||

(17 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||

Line 14: | Line 14: | ||

** whole English words and camelCase for functions (''e.g.'', <hask>orElse</hask> but not <hask>fmap</hask>) | ** whole English words and camelCase for functions (''e.g.'', <hask>orElse</hask> but not <hask>fmap</hask>) | ||

− | == | + | == Design Philosophy == |

− | Although, not | + | === Taking Typeclasses Seriously === |

+ | Following [[Not just Maybe]], functions should be generalized whenever possible. Of course, efficiency might be a concern but this is a fun project anyway. | ||

+ | * <hask>concat</hask> means the same thing as <hask>join</hask>. We propose we don't use <hask>concat</hask> at all. | ||

+ | * <hask>concatMap</hask> is just <hask>(>>=)</hask>. That is, monadic functions are preferred over the same functions with different name. | ||

+ | |||

+ | === The Hierarchy === | ||

+ | |||

+ | Although, not Haskell98, hierarchical modules are already in Haskell2010. We take it for granted. | ||

* <hask>TheOtherPrelude</hask> - Minimalistic module. | * <hask>TheOtherPrelude</hask> - Minimalistic module. | ||

* <hask>TheOtherPrelude.Utilities</hask> - Convenient definitions. The reasoning behind its existence is that we want the Prelude to be very concise. It should not steal good names. | * <hask>TheOtherPrelude.Utilities</hask> - Convenient definitions. The reasoning behind its existence is that we want the Prelude to be very concise. It should not steal good names. | ||

+ | * <hask>TheOtherPrelude.Legacy</hask> - providing as much backwards compatibility as possible | ||

== Open Issues == | == Open Issues == | ||

− | |||

* When the same function has an infix and a prefix implementation, should one of them be outside the class to enforce consistency? | * When the same function has an infix and a prefix implementation, should one of them be outside the class to enforce consistency? | ||

− | * Should Prelude functions use <hask>Integer</hask> instead of <hask>Int</hask>? | + | * Should Prelude functions use <hask>Integer</hask> instead of <hask>Int</hask>? Maybe <hask>Integral n => n</hask> or <hask>Ix i => i</hask> in some cases? |

* Should <hask>String</hask> be a class rather than a type synonym? | * Should <hask>String</hask> be a class rather than a type synonym? | ||

* The current proposal lacks a well thought <hask>fail</hask> mechanism. Should it be integrated into <hask>MonadZero</hask>, or have a class of his own, or remain in the <hask>Monad</hask> class? | * The current proposal lacks a well thought <hask>fail</hask> mechanism. Should it be integrated into <hask>MonadZero</hask>, or have a class of his own, or remain in the <hask>Monad</hask> class? | ||

Line 30: | Line 37: | ||

== Reality == | == Reality == | ||

− | What we have here right now is not ready to be adopted by existing projects. | + | What we have here right now is not ready to be adopted by existing projects. The [[class system extension proposal]] might make a difference. |

== The Code == | == The Code == | ||

Line 36: | Line 43: | ||

Currently, the code is in Wiki form. If people do agree that the collaborative decisions begot something pretty, we'll have a group of files in darcs.haskell.org some time. | Currently, the code is in Wiki form. If people do agree that the collaborative decisions begot something pretty, we'll have a group of files in darcs.haskell.org some time. | ||

− | The imaginary Prelude as it stands | + | The imaginary Prelude as it stands: |

=== <hask>TheOtherPrelude.hs</hask> === | === <hask>TheOtherPrelude.hs</hask> === | ||

<haskell> | <haskell> | ||

+ | {-# LANGUAGE NoImplicitPrelude #-} | ||

+ | |||

module TheOtherPrelude where | module TheOtherPrelude where | ||

− | import Prelude () -- hide everything | + | import Prelude (id, const, flip, (.)) |

+ | -- hide almost everything | ||

+ | -- in fact, we could do better, by just defining them here | ||

+ | |||

+ | -- The idea is to rename 'fmap'. | ||

+ | -- Both map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b] (in []) | ||

+ | -- and (.) :: (a -> b) -> (e -> a) -> (e -> b) (in (->) e) | ||

+ | -- are good names, and are intuitively prefix and infix respectively. | ||

+ | -- 'map' is aliased as (.) below. | ||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

class Functor f where | class Functor f where | ||

map :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b | map :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b | ||

− | (.) = | + | -- definitely a bad idea, sorry Cale! |

+ | -- (.) :: (Functor f) => (a -> b) -> f a -> f b | ||

+ | -- (.) = map | ||

− | |||

− | |||

class (Functor p) => Applicative p where | class (Functor p) => Applicative p where | ||

− | -- Minimal complete definition: return and (< | + | -- Minimal complete definition: return and (<@>). |

− | + | pure :: a -> p a -- value lifting | |

− | (< | + | -- actually I think we should |

+ | -- stick to return | ||

+ | -- to make do notation work | ||

+ | (<@>) :: p (a -> b) -> p a -> p b -- lifted application | ||

(>>) :: p a -> p b -> p b -- when the second is independent of the first | (>>) :: p a -> p b -> p b -- when the second is independent of the first | ||

− | + | pa >> pb = (const id) . pa <@> pb | |

− | + | --map f pa = return f <@> pa -- see Class system extension proposal, below | |

− | apply = ( | + | apply :: (Applicative p) => p (a -> b) -> p a -> p b |

+ | apply = (<@>) | ||

class (Applicative m) => Monad m where | class (Applicative m) => Monad m where | ||

Line 72: | Line 89: | ||

join :: m (m a) -> m a -- combining levels of structure | join :: m (m a) -> m a -- combining levels of structure | ||

− | + | ma >>= k = join (map k ma) | |

− | + | join mma = mma >>= id | |

− | join | + | --mf <@> ma = mf >>= flip map ma -- see Class system extension proposal, below |

+ | --ma >> mb = ma >>= const mb | ||

+ | --map f ma = ma >>= return . f -- this depends on (.), which is map! Be careful. | ||

− | -- We | + | -- We copy from the MonadPlus reform proposal (link below) now. |

-- 'zero' will be used when pattern matching against refutable patterns in | -- 'zero' will be used when pattern matching against refutable patterns in | ||

-- do-notation as well as to provide support for monad comprehensions. | -- do-notation as well as to provide support for monad comprehensions. | ||

− | + | ||

class (Monad mz) => MonadZero mz where | class (Monad mz) => MonadZero mz where | ||

+ | -- Should satisfy 'left zero': zero >>= f = zero | ||

zero :: mz a | zero :: mz a | ||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

class (MonadZero mp) => MonadPlus mp where | class (MonadZero mp) => MonadPlus mp where | ||

+ | -- Should satisfy 'monoid': | ||

+ | -- zero ++ b = b; b ++ zero = b | ||

+ | -- (a ++ b) ++ c = a ++ (b ++ c) | ||

+ | -- and 'left distribution': | ||

+ | -- (a ++ b) >>= f = (a >>= f) ++ (b >>= f) | ||

(++) :: mp a -> mp a -> mp a | (++) :: mp a -> mp a -> mp a | ||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

− | |||

class (MonadZero mo) => MonadOr mo where | class (MonadZero mo) => MonadOr mo where | ||

+ | -- Should satisfy 'monoid': | ||

+ | -- zero `orElse` b = b; b `orElse` zero = b | ||

+ | -- (a `orElse` b) `orElse` c = a `orElse` (b `orElse` c) | ||

+ | -- and 'left catch': | ||

+ | -- (return a) `orElse` b = a | ||

orElse :: mo a -> mo a -> mo a | orElse :: mo a -> mo a -> mo a | ||

+ | |||

+ | class (Monad m) => MonadFail m where | ||

+ | fail :: String -> m a | ||

</haskell> | </haskell> | ||

Line 107: | Line 131: | ||

-- this is the if-then-else proposal | -- this is the if-then-else proposal | ||

-- the name has been chosen to reflect the magic of Church booleans! | -- the name has been chosen to reflect the magic of Church booleans! | ||

− | boolean | + | -- the order of arguments matches that of maybe and either. |

− | boolean | + | boolean x _ True = x |

+ | boolean _ y False = y | ||

</haskell> | </haskell> | ||

Line 116: | Line 141: | ||

-- ''The Other Prelude'' is an alternative, not a replacement. | -- ''The Other Prelude'' is an alternative, not a replacement. | ||

-- So we need to hide everything from the Prelude | -- So we need to hide everything from the Prelude | ||

− | import Prelude () | + | --import Prelude () |

− | + | -- Now that we have it, | |

+ | {-# LANGUAGE NoImplicitPrelude #-} | ||

-- This is just an example assuming there is nothing to hide | -- This is just an example assuming there is nothing to hide | ||

import TheOtherPrelude | import TheOtherPrelude | ||

Line 123: | Line 149: | ||

-- Hopefully, this module will contain lift,... | -- Hopefully, this module will contain lift,... | ||

-- Standard convention is to use M.lift (instead of liftM) | -- Standard convention is to use M.lift (instead of liftM) | ||

− | import qualified TheOtherPrelude.Monad.Kleisli as M | + | -- import qualified TheOtherPrelude.Monad.Kleisli as M |

</haskell> | </haskell> | ||

Line 129: | Line 155: | ||

* [[Class system extension proposal]] - Makes this proposal worth reading at last | * [[Class system extension proposal]] - Makes this proposal worth reading at last | ||

+ | * [[Quantified contexts]] - Another important issue | ||

* [[Functor hierarchy proposal]] - Making <hask>Monad m</hask> imply <hask>Functor m</hask> (adopted by ''The Other Prelude''). | * [[Functor hierarchy proposal]] - Making <hask>Monad m</hask> imply <hask>Functor m</hask> (adopted by ''The Other Prelude''). | ||

+ | * [[Functor-Applicative-Monad Proposal]] - in essence the same proposal, perhaps showing this sentiment is more common than assumed | ||

* [[If-then-else]] - Making <hask>if</hask> a function (partially adopted by ''The Other Prelude'', we are silent on the bigger issue of sugar). | * [[If-then-else]] - Making <hask>if</hask> a function (partially adopted by ''The Other Prelude'', we are silent on the bigger issue of sugar). | ||

* [http://software.complete.org/missingh/static/doc/ MissingH] - Functions "missing" from the Haskell Prelude/libraries. | * [http://software.complete.org/missingh/static/doc/ MissingH] - Functions "missing" from the Haskell Prelude/libraries. | ||

* [[MonadPlus reform proposal]] - Clarifies ambiguities around MonadPlus laws (adopted by ''The Other Prelude'') | * [[MonadPlus reform proposal]] - Clarifies ambiguities around MonadPlus laws (adopted by ''The Other Prelude'') | ||

− | * [[Mathematical prelude discussion]] - A | + | * [[Mathematical prelude discussion]] - A [[Numeric Prelude]] in good shape already. Will a merger be ever possible? |

− | * [[Prelude extensions]] and [[ | + | * [[Prelude extensions]] and [[List function suggestions]] - Unlike ''The Other Prelude'' they ''enhance'' the Prelude. |

− | * [ | + | * [[Not just Maybe]] - Instead of writing inside a specific monad (i.e. Maybe) write functions generalized on (Monad m)=> where possible. |

[[Category:Proposals]] | [[Category:Proposals]] | ||

[[Category:Mathematics]] | [[Category:Mathematics]] | ||

[[Category:Code]] | [[Category:Code]] |

## Latest revision as of 22:37, 22 December 2010

## Contents

## Call For Contribution

This fun project, called *The Other Prelude*, is a creative reconstruction of the standard Prelude. By disregarding history and compatibility, we get a clean sheet.

## Committee

This project has no committee whatsoever. Issues are discussed on the talk page.

## Naming Conventions

- Function names should be easy for beginners to consume.
- Specifically,
*The Other Prelude*naming convention is to use- descriptive symbols for functions that are naturally infix (
*e.g.*,`mplus`

is replaced by`(++)`

) - whole English words and camelCase for functions (
*e.g.*,`orElse`

but not`fmap`

)

- descriptive symbols for functions that are naturally infix (

## Design Philosophy

### Taking Typeclasses Seriously

Following Not just Maybe, functions should be generalized whenever possible. Of course, efficiency might be a concern but this is a fun project anyway.

`concat`

means the same thing as`join`

. We propose we don't use`concat`

at all.`concatMap`

is just`(>>=)`

. That is, monadic functions are preferred over the same functions with different name.

### The Hierarchy

Although, not Haskell98, hierarchical modules are already in Haskell2010. We take it for granted.

`TheOtherPrelude`

- Minimalistic module.`TheOtherPrelude.Utilities`

- Convenient definitions. The reasoning behind its existence is that we want the Prelude to be very concise. It should not steal good names.`TheOtherPrelude.Legacy`

- providing as much backwards compatibility as possible

## Open Issues

- When the same function has an infix and a prefix implementation, should one of them be outside the class to enforce consistency?
- Should Prelude functions use
`Integer`

instead of`Int`

? Maybe`Integral n => n`

or`Ix i => i`

in some cases? - Should
`String`

be a class rather than a type synonym? - The current proposal lacks a well thought
`fail`

mechanism. Should it be integrated into`MonadZero`

, or have a class of his own, or remain in the`Monad`

class?

## Reality

What we have here right now is not ready to be adopted by existing projects. The class system extension proposal might make a difference.

## The Code

Currently, the code is in Wiki form. If people do agree that the collaborative decisions begot something pretty, we'll have a group of files in darcs.haskell.org some time.

The imaginary Prelude as it stands:

`TheOtherPrelude.hs`

```
{-# LANGUAGE NoImplicitPrelude #-}
module TheOtherPrelude where
import Prelude (id, const, flip, (.))
-- hide almost everything
-- in fact, we could do better, by just defining them here
-- The idea is to rename 'fmap'.
-- Both map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b] (in [])
-- and (.) :: (a -> b) -> (e -> a) -> (e -> b) (in (->) e)
-- are good names, and are intuitively prefix and infix respectively.
-- 'map' is aliased as (.) below.
class Functor f where
map :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
-- definitely a bad idea, sorry Cale!
-- (.) :: (Functor f) => (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
-- (.) = map
class (Functor p) => Applicative p where
-- Minimal complete definition: return and (<@>).
pure :: a -> p a -- value lifting
-- actually I think we should
-- stick to return
-- to make do notation work
(<@>) :: p (a -> b) -> p a -> p b -- lifted application
(>>) :: p a -> p b -> p b -- when the second is independent of the first
pa >> pb = (const id) . pa <@> pb
--map f pa = return f <@> pa -- see Class system extension proposal, below
apply :: (Applicative p) => p (a -> b) -> p a -> p b
apply = (<@>)
class (Applicative m) => Monad m where
-- Minimal complete definition: one of join or (>>=).
(>>=) :: m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b -- bind
join :: m (m a) -> m a -- combining levels of structure
ma >>= k = join (map k ma)
join mma = mma >>= id
--mf <@> ma = mf >>= flip map ma -- see Class system extension proposal, below
--ma >> mb = ma >>= const mb
--map f ma = ma >>= return . f -- this depends on (.), which is map! Be careful.
-- We copy from the MonadPlus reform proposal (link below) now.
-- 'zero' will be used when pattern matching against refutable patterns in
-- do-notation as well as to provide support for monad comprehensions.
class (Monad mz) => MonadZero mz where
-- Should satisfy 'left zero': zero >>= f = zero
zero :: mz a
class (MonadZero mp) => MonadPlus mp where
-- Should satisfy 'monoid':
-- zero ++ b = b; b ++ zero = b
-- (a ++ b) ++ c = a ++ (b ++ c)
-- and 'left distribution':
-- (a ++ b) >>= f = (a >>= f) ++ (b >>= f)
(++) :: mp a -> mp a -> mp a
class (MonadZero mo) => MonadOr mo where
-- Should satisfy 'monoid':
-- zero `orElse` b = b; b `orElse` zero = b
-- (a `orElse` b) `orElse` c = a `orElse` (b `orElse` c)
-- and 'left catch':
-- (return a) `orElse` b = a
orElse :: mo a -> mo a -> mo a
class (Monad m) => MonadFail m where
fail :: String -> m a
```

`TheOtherPrelude/Utilities.hs`

```
module TheOtherPrelude.Utilities where
import Prelude () -- hide everything
-- this is the if-then-else proposal
-- the name has been chosen to reflect the magic of Church booleans!
-- the order of arguments matches that of maybe and either.
boolean x _ True = x
boolean _ y False = y
```

## How To Use

```
-- ''The Other Prelude'' is an alternative, not a replacement.
-- So we need to hide everything from the Prelude
--import Prelude ()
-- Now that we have it,
{-# LANGUAGE NoImplicitPrelude #-}
-- This is just an example assuming there is nothing to hide
import TheOtherPrelude
-- Hopefully, this module will contain lift,...
-- Standard convention is to use M.lift (instead of liftM)
-- import qualified TheOtherPrelude.Monad.Kleisli as M
```

## See also

- Class system extension proposal - Makes this proposal worth reading at last
- Quantified contexts - Another important issue
- Functor hierarchy proposal - Making
`Monad m`

imply`Functor m`

(adopted by*The Other Prelude*). - Functor-Applicative-Monad Proposal - in essence the same proposal, perhaps showing this sentiment is more common than assumed
- If-then-else - Making
`if`

a function (partially adopted by*The Other Prelude*, we are silent on the bigger issue of sugar). - MissingH - Functions "missing" from the Haskell Prelude/libraries.
- MonadPlus reform proposal - Clarifies ambiguities around MonadPlus laws (adopted by
*The Other Prelude*) - Mathematical prelude discussion - A Numeric Prelude in good shape already. Will a merger be ever possible?
- Prelude extensions and List function suggestions - Unlike
*The Other Prelude*they*enhance*the Prelude. - Not just Maybe - Instead of writing inside a specific monad (i.e. Maybe) write functions generalized on (Monad m)=> where possible.