clarify nested <~ use with join #101
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When I reused the pattern of nested
<~in #100, I got surprised that the types seemed off. Indeed, I ended up with aState StdGen (State StdGen Situation)instead of just aState StdGen Situation, but hadn't noticed becausewraptakes the quickcheck-like approach of recursing on the inner types. This PR at least clarifies things, so the types are what I'm used to. Should I go further and remove the recursion fromwrap? I considered it (I even have the change stashed right now), but ultimately think that having the extra flexibility might be a good thing in case something weird happens in the future. It's not even the end of the world if everything works with weird types and I don't notice the weirdness until much later, as previously demonstrated. but when I do notice the weirdness, I should get rid of it so the code is easier to understand in the future, hence this PR.