Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork1k
improved definition of pointed functor#229
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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
base:master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
jethrolarson commentedAug 2, 2022 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
I think when I wrote the original I was looking at the"Pointed" typeclass in haskell which doesn't have a requirement of functor so I didn't think that it was necessary. And in a way it's not. A type is pointed if any value can be lifted into it but intuitively a type is only a pointed functor if it's both pointed and a functor. |
cf90849
to6c4dd7d
Compare6c4dd7d
to6d30175
Compare
After readinghttps://stackoverflow.com/questions/39179830/how-to-use-pointed-functor-properly
I thought we should make the definition less wrong.