Typeclassopedia presents the following exercise:
Implement pure and (<*>) in terms of unit and (**), and vice versa.
Here's Monoidal
and MyApplicative
:
class Functor f => Monoidal f where
u :: f () -- using `u` rather than `unit`
dotdot :: f a -> f b -> f (a,b) -- using instead of `(**)`
class Functor f => MyApplicative f where
p :: a -> f a -- using instead of `pure`
apply :: f (a -> b) -> f a -> f b -- using instead of `(<**>)`
First, let me show the Maybe
-like data type:
data Option a = Some a
| None deriving Show
Then, I defined instance MyApplicative Option
:
instance MyApplicative Option where
p = Some
apply None _ = None
apply _ None = None
apply (Some g) f = fmap g f
Finally, my attempt at implementing Monoidal Option
in terms of p
and apply
of MyApplicative
:
instance Monoidal Option where
u = p ()
dotdot None _ = None
dotdot _ None = None
dotdot (Some x) (Some y) = Some id <*> Some (x, y)
Is this right? My implementation of dotdot
with apply
doesn't seem
instance Monoidal Option where
u = p ()
dotdot None _ = None
dotdot _ None = None
dotdot (Some x) (Some y) = apply (Some id) (Some (x, y))
In particular, I'm curious about how to properly implement dotdot :: f a -> f b -> f (a, b)
with Applicative's (<*>)
- in my case it's apply
.
Applicative
is a neat alternative presentation of Monoidal
. Both typeclasses are equivalent, and you can convert between the two without considering a specific data type like Option
. The "neat alternative presentation" for Applicative
is based on the following two equivalencies
pure a = fmap (const a) unit
unit = pure ()
ff <*> fa = fmap (\(f,a) -> f a) $ ff ** fa
fa ** fb = pure (,) <*> fa <*> fb
The trick to get this "neat alternative presentation" for Applicative
is the same as the trick for zipWith
- replace explicit types and constructors in the interface with things that the type or constructor can be passed into to recover what the original interface was.
unit :: f ()
is replaced with pure
which we can substitute the type ()
and the constructor () :: ()
into to recover unit
.
pure :: a -> f a
pure () :: f ()
And similarly (though not as straightforward) for substituting the type (a,b)
and the constructor (,) :: a -> b -> (a,b)
into liftA2
to recover **
.
liftA2 :: (a -> b -> c) -> f a -> f b -> f c
liftA2 (,) :: f a -> f b -> f (a,b)
Applicative
then gets the nice <*>
operator by lifting function application ($) :: (a -> b) -> a -> b
into the functor.
(<*>) :: f (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
(<*>) = liftA2 ($)
Getting from <*>
back to liftA2
is common enough that liftA2
is included in Control.Applicative
. The <$>
is infix fmap
.
liftA2 :: Applicative f => (a -> b -> c) -> f a -> f b -> f c
liftA2 f a b = f <$> a <*> b
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With