NB: This can lead to performance regressions if (*>) is less optimised than (>>) (and/or if traverse is worse than sequence).
hvr austin ekmett bgamari
- Group Reviewers
Core Libraries Committee
- rGHC741cf18a5e4e: Weaken monadic list operations to Applicative
rGHCDIFF741cf18a5e4e: Weaken monadic list operations to Applicative
- Trac Issues
LGTM, but needs an changelog.md entry
we also should do a nofib run to make sure there's no unexpected changes in allocations (although I'm not sure if nofib actually exercises these verbs)
It seems worth including a note in the documentation about 8.0 that indicates that if you experience any performance regressions due to these generalizations, you should fix the implementation of (*>) to match your implementation of (>>).
Then these changes can be done with a clean conscience.
Sounds like a fine place.
Also, do you think you could rebase this and perhaps move the base/changelog entry up the document. It would be nice to have all of the entries for Applicative generalizations grouped together.