Emily Pillmore
Emily Pillmore
Thanks for noting the regression and build plan failure @phadej. Odd that this made it through CI without a hiccup - all builds are building for 2.3.1 with no issue....
Ah right `tranformers` is bundled. Yeah, makes sense. i'll come up with a PR when my brain turns back on after the holidays. Right now, the revision is satisfactory. Thanks...
> My motivation was WriterT in this case. > I also feel like this is the way, that all transformers instances work (except for SelectT). Even ContT is sort of...
@jumper149 I believe i was looking at the PR last night and proved something else for something entirely unrelated to the PR. I checked again and yes, your proof is...
I'm actually not opposed to this, since I often find myself swallowing useless error messages and committing wholesale to algebraic blindness (vis. boolean blindness) in a bunch of important use-cases....
@kozross I'd be in favor of waiting until the next major version bump due to the fact that `liftMaybe` is defined in many places (including Agda): https://hoogle.haskell.org/?hoogle=liftMaybe
If it's obvious what the function does, and users search by type, then the same argument applies to changing the name of the thing to `note`: I don't support breaking...
> Edit: I don't understand why the MonadAccum instance for AccumT also uses Identity as a base monad. I think it should be fine with any monad, right? Not unless...
This case might actually be okay tho. @kozross thoughts?
alright, but what about the addition of `filterKeys` then? (assuming we leave `restrictKeys` alone)