Post by @mcc@mastodon.social

@typeswitch I wound up going with this solution out of all of them because it let me skip a "map" (I was originally going to map the tuple list after forming it)

let next_candidates = (.|.) <$> candidates <*> digits

What this does… may or may not be clear, but I assure you it's very appropriate to the problem I am solving

0 Boosts

0 Likes

gaytabase

@dysfun@social.treehouse.systems 2 hr. ago

@mcc @typeswitch <$> is map.

mcc

@mcc@mastodon.social 1 hr. ago

@dysfun @typeswitch oh rly

let next_candidates = map (.|.) candidates <*> digits

Hmm… do I like that better? I think it might be worse actually because I'm unclear what <*> is binding to and the currying feels "magic" in a bad way

Dieu

@hllizi@hespere.de 1 hr. ago

@mcc @dysfun @typeswitch Using <*> means the function inside the functor value to the left is applied to the thing in the functor value to the right. It's often usefule when you've already done "map" with a curried function and aren't yet ready to stop applying it yet (as in your case, apparently).

gaytabase

@dysfun@social.treehouse.systems 1 hr. ago

@mcc @typeswitch i prefer <$> personally in this context. i think it reads slightly clearer. i'd ideally want some parens in the map version to make it clear.

mcc

@mcc@mastodon.social 1 hr. ago

@dysfun @typeswitch The exact comment I put on the line was "I also have an implementation where I do this with a `do` in list context and a map, but this is funnier"