lue

A common pattern I tend to use is to use the "identity" part as a description, e.g. ```elm Parser.succeed (\name size -> File { name = name, size = size...

> `Parser.succeed always |= p |= q` -> `Parser.succeed identity |. p |= q` needs to be `Parser.succeed always |= p |= q` -> `Parser.succeed identity |= p |. q`...

Nice. - ```elm List.length (List.take 10 list) --> 10 ``` doesn't work because list can have less than 10 elements. - The take and drop ones are already tracked in...

I'd use it if it existed, but... In practice, rules handling patterns in this form like below are pretty useless because - the rule can't provide a good default name...

Tho your example could (?) end up being simplified by `NoUnusedPatterns` ```elm view ((Model m) as model) = div [] [ viewA (Model m) , viewB (Model m) ] -->...

Funny edge case: a `type` with phantom parameters should not be reported by this check. E.g. this code I found in elm-review is _not_ a no-op: ```elm |> (\(ModuleRuleSchema moduleVisitorSchema)...

A super nice set of checks (I love the get and length checks). Maybe ```elm Array.fromList [] --> Array.empty array |> Array.toIndexedList |> List.map Tuple.second --> array |> Array.toList Array.repeat...

I think you meant ```elm Array.initialize 1 f --> Array.fromList [ f 0 ] ```

The suggested check ```elm Array.append (Array.repeat n x) (Array.repeat m x) --> Array.repeat (n + m) x (if n and m are literals, add them up directly) ``` _Only_ works...

Sounds fun and also be quite hard to get right. Simple cases like ```elm List.map g (List.map (\x -> f x) list) --> List.map (\x -> g (f x)) ```...