Name of 1-Tuple Data Type

[Andrew Martin]

Required background information:
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673

GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used. This
is in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely
from an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide a normal
prefix name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this
type is `Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the
haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary tuple, not
the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.

Here are some possible options:

* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only (
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tuple-Only.html)
* OneTuple (
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html
)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)

I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the feature
itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this thread
focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.

[David Feuer]

At present, Unit# is the only way to turn a lifted type into an unlifted
one. Perhaps
Unlift# or Lower# would make sense? The tricky bit is that one could easily
imagine eventually having a version with a strict constructor, in which
case it becomes a bit hard to guess which is which.

Post by Andrew Martin
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used. This

is

Post by Andrew Martin
in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely

from

Post by Andrew Martin
an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide a normal prefix
name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this type is
`Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the haskell
community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary tuple, not the
unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tuple-Only.html)
* OneTuple
(

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html
)

Post by Andrew Martin
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the feature
itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this thread
focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.
--
-Andrew Thaddeus Martin
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[M Farkas-Dyck]

Identity#

[Andrew Martin]

The problem with using Identity and Identity# is that there's already
something in base named Identity, and since it's a newtype (not a data
type), it has the wrong semantics concerning laziness for this kind of
thing.

Post by M Farkas-Dyck
Identity#

[Kris Nuttycombe]

Identity# is my favorite of all those I've seen suggested thus far.

Post by M Farkas-Dyck
Identity#
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Ryan Reich]

Only has two virtues I can see easily: it's short (shorter than almost all
the others), and it has the same feel as Maybe.

There is also Id, the name of the mathematical function that this type (and
corresponding data) constructor is. Less pithy but even less intrusive.

On Jan 17, 2018 15:47, "Andrew Martin" <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Required background information: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/
14673

GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used. This
is in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely
from an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide a normal
prefix name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this
type is `Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the
haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary tuple, not
the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.

Here are some possible options:

* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-
Tuple-Only.html)
* OneTuple (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/
Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)

I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the feature
itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this thread
focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.

[Theodore Lief Gannon]

I've seen Only in the wild, and it's probably my favorite of the initial
suggestions for the same reasons as Ryan. Mono is my second pick from that
list.

Id is very clean, but I could see pedagogical issues arising from name
confusion. Sing(le(ton)) is a terrible idea for the same reason.

Venturing my own paint swatch: Solo fits in nicely with the established
size-specific names (pair, triple, etc.) and has all the good traits:
short, self-explanatory, nothing with a confusingly similar name (that I
know of).

On Jan 17, 2018 4:35 PM, "Ryan Reich" <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Only has two virtues I can see easily: it's short (shorter than almost all
the others), and it has the same feel as Maybe.

There is also Id, the name of the mathematical function that this type (and
corresponding data) constructor is. Less pithy but even less intrusive.

On Jan 17, 2018 15:47, "Andrew Martin" <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Required background information: https://ghc.haske
ll.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673

GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used. This
is in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely
from an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide a normal
prefix name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this
type is `Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the
haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary tuple, not
the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.

Here are some possible options:

* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tupl
e-Only.html)
* OneTuple (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Dat
a-Tuple-OneTuple.html)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)

I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the feature
itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this thread
focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.

[Andreas Abel]

I deem this feature outside of the mainstream, so it should not occupy a
short nice name.

I suggest UnaryTuple.

I quite like Solo.
Simon
*Theodore Lief Gannon
*Sent:* 18 January 2018 02:42
*Subject:* Re: Name of 1-Tuple Data Type
I've seen Only in the wild, and it's probably my favorite of the initial
suggestions for the same reasons as Ryan. Mono is my second pick from
that list.
Id is very clean, but I could see pedagogical issues arising from name
confusion. Sing(le(ton)) is a terrible idea for the same reason.
Venturing my own paint swatch: Solo fits in nicely with the established
short, self-explanatory, nothing with a confusingly similar name (that I
know of).
Only has two virtues I can see easily: it's short (shorter than
almost all the others), and it has the same feel as Maybe.
There is also Id, the name of the mathematical function that this
type (and corresponding data) constructor is. Less pithy but even
less intrusive.
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed
variant). The unboxed variant currently must be fully applied
whenever it is used. This is in stark contrast to all the other
n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely from an issue of syntax. The
solution decided on is to provide a normal prefix name for the
1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this type is
`Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the
haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary
tuple, not the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tuple-Only.html
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhackage.haskell.org%2Fpackage%2FOnly-0.1%2Fdocs%2FData-Tuple-Only.html&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=fMbHCFU%2Br3JHwmI8a4QgHD26fhoclfklE3xA0O6tCE4%3D&reserved=0>)
* OneTuple
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhackage.haskell.org%2Fpackage%2FOneTuple-0.2.1%2Fdocs%2FData-Tuple-OneTuple.html&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=rRLW8KJoKT5IQ5Y6s3kMrUOiUGk6xa77zb5VvGuAfGw%3D&reserved=0>)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or
any additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns
about the feature itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd
prefer to keep this thread focused on just the problem of coming
up with a name.
--
-Andrew Thaddeus Martin
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flibraries&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=AytyB%2BhKwE1TDDc8ohTJ9gDcCZgcizoyt8Tmue0u9Zs%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flibraries&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=AytyB%2BhKwE1TDDc8ohTJ9gDcCZgcizoyt8Tmue0u9Zs%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Oleg Grenrus]

Are we talking about the following:

    {-# LANGUAGE MagicHash, KindSignatures #-}

    import GHC.Exts

    data Unit# (a :: TYPE 'UnliftedRep) = Unit# a

    -- | Also known as:
    --
    --
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/vector-0.12.0.1/docs/Data-Vector-Fusion-Util.html#t:Box
    --
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html#t:OneTuple
    data Unit  (a :: TYPE 'LiftedRep)   = Unit a

    -- | Also known as
    --
    --
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/vector-0.12.0.1/docs/Data-Vector-Fusion-Util.html#t:Id
    --
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tuple-Only.html
    --
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/generics-sop-0.3.2.0/docs/Generics-SOP-BasicFunctors.html#t:I
    newtype Identity a = Identity a
--
Some libraries (cassava, postgresql-simple - today they use different
`Only`!)
need a wrapper around a type to provide `Field a => Row a` instances,

I haven't needed a `Box` around lifted type, except when putting things
into strict containers. That name weren't proposed, but I don't feel
strongly for or against. Yet, I think `Box#` and `Box` have nice
intuition in them.

- Oleg

Post by Andreas Abel
I deem this feature outside of the mainstream, so it should not occupy
a short nice name.
I suggest  UnaryTuple.

I quite like Solo.
Simon
*Theodore Lief Gannon
*Sent:* 18 January 2018 02:42
*Subject:* Re: Name of 1-Tuple Data Type
I've seen Only in the wild, and it's probably my favorite of the
initial suggestions for the same reasons as Ryan. Mono is my second
pick from that list.
Id is very clean, but I could see pedagogical issues arising from
name confusion. Sing(le(ton)) is a terrible idea for the same reason.
Venturing my own paint swatch: Solo fits in nicely with the
established size-specific names (pair, triple, etc.) and has all the
good traits: short, self-explanatory, nothing with a confusingly
similar name (that I know of).
    Only has two virtues I can see easily: it's short (shorter than
    almost all the others), and it has the same feel as Maybe.
    There is also Id, the name of the mathematical function that this
    type (and corresponding data) constructor is. Less pithy but even
    less intrusive.
        https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
        GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed
        variant). The unboxed variant currently must be fully applied
        whenever it is used. This is in stark contrast to all the other
        n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely from an issue of syntax. The
        solution decided on is to provide a normal prefix name for the
        1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this type is
        `Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the
        haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary
        tuple, not the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
        * Unary (as in unary tuple)
        * Single (as in single, double, triple)
        * Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
        * Only
       
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tuple-Only.html
       
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhackage.haskell.org%2Fpackage%2FOnly-0.1%2Fdocs%2FData-Tuple-Only.html&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=fMbHCFU%2Br3JHwmI8a4QgHD26fhoclfklE3xA0O6tCE4%3D&reserved=0>)
        * OneTuple
       
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html
       
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhackage.haskell.org%2Fpackage%2FOneTuple-0.2.1%2Fdocs%2FData-Tuple-OneTuple.html&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=rRLW8KJoKT5IQ5Y6s3kMrUOiUGk6xa77zb5VvGuAfGw%3D&reserved=0>)
        * Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
        * Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
        I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or
        any additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns
        about the feature itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd
        prefer to keep this thread focused on just the problem of coming
        up with a name.
        --
        -Andrew Thaddeus Martin
        _______________________________________________
        Libraries mailing list
        http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
       
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flibraries&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=AytyB%2BhKwE1TDDc8ohTJ9gDcCZgcizoyt8Tmue0u9Zs%3D&reserved=0>
    _______________________________________________
    Libraries mailing list
    http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
   
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flibraries&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=AytyB%2BhKwE1TDDc8ohTJ9gDcCZgcizoyt8Tmue0u9Zs%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Andrew Martin]

It's certainly outside of the mainstream, but it's not going to be part of
the prelude. You'll need to import GHC.Prim or GHC.Exts to get a hold of
it. For this reason, I'm not too worried about stealing a good name.

Post by Andreas Abel
I deem this feature outside of the mainstream, so it should not occupy a
short nice name.
I suggest UnaryTuple.

I quite like Solo.
Simon
*Theodore Lief Gannon
*Sent:* 18 January 2018 02:42
*Subject:* Re: Name of 1-Tuple Data Type
I've seen Only in the wild, and it's probably my favorite of the initial
suggestions for the same reasons as Ryan. Mono is my second pick from that
list.
Id is very clean, but I could see pedagogical issues arising from name
confusion. Sing(le(ton)) is a terrible idea for the same reason.
Venturing my own paint swatch: Solo fits in nicely with the established
short, self-explanatory, nothing with a confusingly similar name (that I
know of).
Only has two virtues I can see easily: it's short (shorter than
almost all the others), and it has the same feel as Maybe.
There is also Id, the name of the mathematical function that this
type (and corresponding data) constructor is. Less pithy but even
less intrusive.
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed
variant). The unboxed variant currently must be fully applied
whenever it is used. This is in stark contrast to all the other
n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely from an issue of syntax. The
solution decided on is to provide a normal prefix name for the
1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this type is
`Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the
haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary
tuple, not the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tupl
e-Only.html
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%
3A%2F%2Fhackage.haskell.org%2Fpackage%2FOnly-0.1%2Fdocs%
2FData-Tuple-Only.html&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.
com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91a
b2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=fMbHCFU%2Br
3JHwmI8a4QgHD26fhoclfklE3xA0O6tCE4%3D&reserved=0>)
* OneTuple
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Dat
a-Tuple-OneTuple.html
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%
3A%2F%2Fhackage.haskell.org%2Fpackage%2FOneTuple-0.2.1%
2Fdocs%2FData-Tuple-OneTuple.html&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%
40microsoft.com%7C3db602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988b
f86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&
sdata=rRLW8KJoKT5IQ5Y6s3kMrUOiUGk6xa77zb5VvGuAfGw%3D&reserved=0>)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or
any additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns
about the feature itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd
prefer to keep this thread focused on just the problem of coming
up with a name.
--
-Andrew Thaddeus Martin
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%
2Flibraries&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3d
b602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd01
1db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=AytyB%2BhKwE1TDDc8o
hTJ9gDcCZgcizoyt8Tmue0u9Zs%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
2F%2Fmail.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%
2Flibraries&data=02%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7C3d
b602b14f26474965ff08d55e1d285f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd01
1db47%7C1%7C0%7C636518401685292292&sdata=AytyB%2BhKwE1TDDc8o
hTJ9gDcCZgcizoyt8Tmue0u9Zs%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

--
Andreas Abel <>< Du bist der geliebte Mensch.
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Chalmers and Gothenburg University, Sweden
http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~abela/
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Andrew Martin]

I like Solo. I think it would be a very good name for this for the reasons
you listed.

Post by Theodore Lief Gannon
I've seen Only in the wild, and it's probably my favorite of the initial
suggestions for the same reasons as Ryan. Mono is my second pick from that
list.
Id is very clean, but I could see pedagogical issues arising from name
confusion. Sing(le(ton)) is a terrible idea for the same reason.
Venturing my own paint swatch: Solo fits in nicely with the established
short, self-explanatory, nothing with a confusingly similar name (that I
know of).
Only has two virtues I can see easily: it's short (shorter than almost all
the others), and it has the same feel as Maybe.
There is also Id, the name of the mathematical function that this type
(and corresponding data) constructor is. Less pithy but even less intrusive.
Required background information: https://ghc.haske
ll.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used. This
is in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely
from an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide a normal
prefix name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this
type is `Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the
haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary tuple, not
the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tupl
e-Only.html)
* OneTuple (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Dat
a-Tuple-OneTuple.html)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the feature
itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this thread
focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.
--
-Andrew Thaddeus Martin
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Carter Schonwald]

Unit# seems fine to me, its not gonna be in prelude, its a short name,

i dislike Only because i've only really seen it come up in in DB libraries
:)

Post by Andrew Martin
I like Solo. I think it would be a very good name for this for the reasons
you listed.

Post by Theodore Lief Gannon
I've seen Only in the wild, and it's probably my favorite of the initial
suggestions for the same reasons as Ryan. Mono is my second pick from that
list.
Id is very clean, but I could see pedagogical issues arising from name
confusion. Sing(le(ton)) is a terrible idea for the same reason.
Venturing my own paint swatch: Solo fits in nicely with the established
short, self-explanatory, nothing with a confusingly similar name (that I
know of).
Only has two virtues I can see easily: it's short (shorter than almost
all the others), and it has the same feel as Maybe.
There is also Id, the name of the mathematical function that this type
(and corresponding data) constructor is. Less pithy but even less intrusive.
Required background information: https://ghc.haske
ll.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used. This
is in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely
from an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide a normal
prefix name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this
type is `Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the
haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary tuple, not
the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tupl
e-Only.html)
* OneTuple (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Dat
a-Tuple-OneTuple.html)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the feature
itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this thread
focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.
--
-Andrew Thaddeus Martin
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

--
-Andrew Thaddeus Martin
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Andreas Abel]

-1.

Don't grap any of these nice names for that obscure feature. Take some
ugly name.

Post by Andrew Martin
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used.
This is in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems
entirely from an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide
a normal prefix name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally
for this type is `Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However,
in the haskell community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary
tuple, not the unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tuple-Only.html)
* OneTuple
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the
feature itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this
thread focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.

[David Feuer]

I imagine whatever name is chosen will have a # at the end.

-1.
Don't grap any of these nice names for that obscure feature. Take some ugly
name.

Post by Andrew Martin
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used. This is
in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely from
an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide a normal prefix
name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this type is
`Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the haskell
community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary tuple, not the
unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tuple-Only.html)
* OneTuple
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the feature
itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this thread
focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.

--
Andreas Abel <>< Du bist der geliebte Mensch.
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Chalmers and Gothenburg University, Sweden
http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~abela/
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Henning Thielemann]

Post by David Feuer
I imagine whatever name is chosen will have a # at the end.

... and you can disambiguate using qualification.

[Andreas Abel]

Post by Henning Thielemann

Post by David Feuer
I imagine whatever name is chosen will have a # at the end.

Then there is no concern.

Post by Henning Thielemann

Post by David Feuer
I imagine whatever name is chosen will have a # at the end.

... and you can disambiguate using qualification.
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Ivan Lazar Miljenovic]

-1.
Don't grap any of these nice names for that obscure feature. Take some ugly
name.

It seems like an obscure feature, but something similar has been
re-implemented by a suprising number of libraries (vector,
postgresql-simple, cassava, etc.). Typically when you want to
differentiate a raw value from a (possible singular) collection of
values (e.g. field vs row).

Post by Andrew Martin
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673
GHC has a one-tuple (both a boxed variant and an unboxed variant). The
unboxed variant currently must be fully applied whenever it is used. This is
in stark contrast to all the other n-tuples (n > 1). It stems entirely from
an issue of syntax. The solution decided on is to provide a normal prefix
name for the 1-tuple. The name that GHC uses internally for this type is
`Unit#` (there is also a boxed variant Unit). However, in the haskell
community, the word "unit" already refers to the nullary tuple, not the
unary tuple. So, we're bikeshedding the name.
* Unary (as in unary tuple)
* Single (as in single, double, triple)
* Singleton (as is singleton, doubleton, tripleton)
* Only
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Only-0.1/docs/Data-Tuple-Only.html)
* OneTuple
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/OneTuple-0.2.1/docs/Data-Tuple-OneTuple.html)
* Uni (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
* Mono (means "one" in latin or greek or something like that)
I would appreciate any feedback on the suggestions I provided or any
additional suggestions for the name. If you have concerns about the feature
itself, comment on the GHC Trac ticket. I'd prefer to keep this thread
focused on just the problem of coming up with a name.

--
Andreas Abel <>< Du bist der geliebte Mensch.
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Chalmers and Gothenburg University, Sweden
http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~abela/
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

[Mario Blažević]

Post by Andrew Martin
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14673

+1 for Only, because it's short and already in use. It's also used by my
own libraries
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/rank2classes-1.0.1/docs/Rank2.html#t:Only),
so I wouldn't need to rename it. Selfish I know.