foldr1 and foldl1 are too restrictive

未关闭
#151 1 条评论 3 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
5/5
预计耗时
一周以上
新手友好度
36/100
Issue 类型
功能
描述清晰度
基本清楚
活跃度
停滞
领域
backend

调研方向

Start by comparing the proposed and current foldr1 signatures in the issue, then trace their definitions and the corresponding foldl1 implementation in the repository. Check existing tests for these functions and determine whether the proposed terminal-value mapping behavior can be supported without a full traversal; done means the API decision and its behavior are covered by tests. The issue has had no comment activity for over four years.

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

type: breaking change

Should the signature of foldr1 (and similarly foldl1) be:

foldr1 :: forall f a b. Foldable1 f => (a -> b -> b) -> (a -> b) -> f a -> b

I understand the logic behind the current signature:

foldr1 :: forall f a b. Foldable1 f => (b -> b -> b) -> f b -> b

In that, if I have a mapping from a -> b, then I can pre-map unconditionally, and derive the latter signature. Unfortunately that's not actually what I want to do:

  • I only want the mapping to apply to the terminal value.
  • I want to otherwise combine with the combining function.
  • I don't want to waste an entire traversal to make the signature work.

I feel like there's a missed opportunity with the current signature. To be honest, I almost never want the current signature.

主要语言
PureScript
星标
51
派生
57
平均合并
3 天 14 分钟
30 天内合并 PR
1

环境准备

  • 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
  • 有 Pull Request 模板
  • 没有贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

purescript/purescript-foldable-traversable 的其他 Issue

查看 purescript/purescript-foldable-traversable 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Backend & API Design Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。